Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game Consoles?

May 14, 2009 -

The debate over whether prison inmates should be allowed video game consoles is one that surfaces periodically.

But the head of Britain's Serious Organised Crime Agency offered a new twist this week when SOCA director-general Bill Hughes claimed that jailed crime lords were controlling their illicit empires via Internet-enabled video game consoles. U.K. newspaper the Times reported Hughes's comments:

If you are locked up, how do you communicate with others? And we have been highlighting the fact it is not always with mobile telephones. There is other technology used — people are using PlayStations to charge their mobile phones and are playing games interactively with others, so are able to communicate with them.

The Prison Service is concerned that prisoners are using interactive games to talk to people outside the prison. Communication is the name of the game and criminals are looking to exploit new technologies. Prisoners have rights and they have access to the internet...

U.K. prison officials, however, expressed outrage over Hughes's remarks, which apparently caught them off-guard. A spokesman for the Prison Service told the Times:

Prisoners have never been allowed access to wireless enabled technology such as that used in some games consoles. Nor would they ever be allowed access to such technology.

A decision was taken some years ago that the then-current generation of games consoles should be barred because the capability to send or receive radio signals is an integral part of the equipment.

Although the Times mentions that SOCA chief Hughes later apologized privately to prison boss Phil Wheatley, the newspaper also reports that SOCA is standing by its original claim.

As GamePolitics has previously reported, U.K. prisons allow inmates with good behavior to use game consoles. Potentially suicidal inmates are also permitted to play.

Via: Kotaku


Comments

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

I, unlike Austin Lewis who seemingly enjoys kicking it with correctional officers, avoid law authority as much as possible. I ain't voluntarily speaking with 5-0 about a thing. Where I'm from, you don't roll like that unless you wanna get labeled a "snitch" and get murked behind that bullshit. If I can point you along a breadcrumb trail to something, I'll happily do so. But we can't be seriously talking about my need to refute Austin Lewis' heresay about what some C.O. in some Podunk Prison told him, are we? 

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

It's getting a little tight in here.

That's fine then, you don't want verify something because your aversion to po-lice and any article you find online probably won't be 'authentic' enough for you. I'll just let the matter rest, if you happen to be to get thrown in jail remember to ask someone, I'll be sure to do the same.

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

I'll gladly search for on-line support for the fact that "shiv" went out of style the same time "groovy" did. I'll post anything I find at the foot of this thread.

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

o_O Because surprise buttsecks in prison is an institution, not an anomaly?

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

Why haven't jails installed Cellular Inhibitors yet?  You'd think that'd be a smart move in the attempts to cut down on inmates using cell phones...

And a better question is if they're not using their cell phones to get online with the console, how are they getting online?

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

So don't allow internet in prison.....

http://www.eliteownage.com/nice

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

So don't allow entertainment in prison! These people are getting all the luxuries of law-abiding citizens? What's the point of jail, again? Oh, that's right...PUNISHMENT! But that's inhumane, to separate a man from his PS3. Cruel and unusual? Give me a break.

Don't drop the Wiimote...

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

A console is hardly saomething that makes up for not seeing the outside world for several years.

The main point though is that there are practical reasons for this.  Allowing certain privilidges is a convenient way to keep order.  The well behaved prisoners get to play games.  If they start acting up, you can take it away.  Much less hassle than solitary, and having both carrot and stick gives the warders more options. 

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

Yup, yup. All the luxuries of law-abiding citizens (and law-breaking citizens who get away with it). Except for, you know, strolling through the park, going to theme parks, carnivals, and circuses, and sex. Did I mention the part about being in a prison?

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

"and sex"

I thought they were allowed conjugal visits.

----------------------------------------------------

Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.

---------------------------------------------------- Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.

Re: Do U.K. officials have too much free time on their hands?

I'll just accept that your post was made in the context of your name, in which case, I agree.

Re: Are Jailed Crime Bosses Controlling Empires Via Game ...

Second'd
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Mattsworknameohh, gods that game is pretty, just not my style these days07/29/2015 - 11:49pm
Andrew EisenUbisoft's Child of Light.07/29/2015 - 11:45pm
MattsworknameEnjoy man, Im gonna be playing split second myself07/29/2015 - 11:45pm
Andrew EisenSorry. That just slipped out. Off to play.07/29/2015 - 11:43pm
Andrew EisenWords have meanings, people! Use the damn dictionary! They're online! They're free! Arrggghhhh!07/29/2015 - 11:42pm
Andrew EisenThis is just depressing. I'm gonna go play video games.07/29/2015 - 11:42pm
Mattsworknameproliferation of the whole "internet movment" thing, people dont debate, they try to attack and go after peole to shut them down, casue it's easier then trying to debate the issues07/29/2015 - 11:39pm
MattsworknameWhen you break it down, what it is is the shifting of the media lanscape and how it effects news sites and other groups. once upon a time, you could have run that same article and it would have created debate, not online campagns, now, cause of the07/29/2015 - 11:38pm
MattsworknameCall it waht you wil, but thats how its viewed, not just by me, but by just about EVERYONE right now. Media, new networks, they dont' want to call it what it is, soe they call it "accountability"07/29/2015 - 11:34pm
Andrew Eisen"Gamasutra... had to pay" Yes. That's EXACTLY what it was. "Accountability" is and always was horse poop.07/29/2015 - 11:29pm
MattsworknameSo to speak07/29/2015 - 11:28pm
MattsworknameThats why this happened, you get people who felt hurt, marginalize, bettrayd, or otherwise offended, and they don't actually look at teh facts, they just attack and try to get there Blood for Blood07/29/2015 - 11:28pm
Mattsworknamefalse. Weather you think the article was right or not, there was a large group who felt taht gamastura and the other media sites had to pay for there actions, weather they deserved it or not07/29/2015 - 11:27pm
Andrew EisenTrying to yank advertising over a single opinion piece on a site that I would bet money most of the offended (if you will) didn't read, is no more an attempt at accountability than the Brown shooting's subsequent riots.07/29/2015 - 11:27pm
MattsworknameMy point andrew is that it's not about them, its about the people responding to the situation. THe brown shooting was eventually shown to be completely justified, but the "Black lives matter" meme kept on rolling despite all it's intiall claims being07/29/2015 - 11:26pm
Andrew EisenDude, you're comparing an opinion piece with someone who was shot to death. Gamasutra and Alexander already were accountable for the opinion piece in question.07/29/2015 - 11:25pm
Mattsworknamekinds of events. nor has it stopped them from being asshats in my opinion, but in there view, they have to hold someone accountible for recent events, so they are doing what they think they must, even if it's based on falsehoods07/29/2015 - 11:22pm
MattsworknameAndrew: It's really a matter of context for the people involved. For example. The "Black lives matter" thing is based on an entirely false account of events in the brown shooting, but that hasnt' stopped it from triyng to hold Polititcians accountable for07/29/2015 - 11:22pm
Andrew EisenWouldn't surprise me. A lot of words' actual meanings escape many people on the internet.07/29/2015 - 11:17pm
Andrew EisenSo, "they must be held accountable" means "we must hurt them for publishing an opinion piece we don't like."07/29/2015 - 11:17pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician