Thursday, July 31, 2003
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Inmate says sex with guard led to pregnancy

An inmate at a privately operated Southern Nevada prison is pregnant, and she has told state officials the father is a corrections officer.

The allegation has prompted the attorney general to review the state's agreement with Corrections Corp. of America to determine whether a breach of contract occurred. The Nashville, Tenn., company runs the Southern Nevada Women's Correctional Facility.

Corrections Corp. placed the officer accused of having sex with the inmate on administrative leave, but he could face felony charges if Department of Corrections investigators determine he had sex with the woman, who has been incarcerated for there for the past two years.

"We believe it was consensual," said Howard Skolnik, assistant director of the Corrections Department. "If the individual accused of doing this did this, it was a very foolish and unwise thing to do that will have very bad consequences."

Because of the ongoing investigation, Skolnik would not release the names of the officer and the inmate.

The inmate was placed in the North Las Vegas facility in February 2001 after she was convicted of unknown charges. Conjugal visits are prohibited at the prison.

She was transferred to the regional medical facility at the Northern Nevada Correctional Center in Carson City on July 23 after state officials confirmed she was pregnant.

Corrections Corp. told state officials about the woman's condition last week and refused to comment publicly about the pregnancy. A company spokesman said officials are cooperating with investigators and that thorough criminal background checks were conducted on all 78 of the prison's corrections officers.

The state Corrections Department has assigned a second state monitor to the facility to oversee Corrections Corp. management.

The Southern Nevada Women's Correctional Facility is the only privatized prison in Nevada. The state pays Corrections Corp. about $47 per inmate per day to manage the prison's 437 female inmates, Skolnik said.

Should the investigation uncover other allegations of sexual contact between staff and inmates, Skolnik said the company's contract with the state, which expires in October 2004, could be in jeopardy.

Gov. Kenny Guinn or Corrections Director Jackie Crawford would determine whether the contract should be terminated.

Crawford did not return calls from the Review-Journal, and a spokesman for Guinn said the governor would not comment on the contract during the investigation.

"It'll depend on whether (Corrections Corp.) handled this appropriately," Skolnik said. "I suspect this in and of itself would not result in terminating the contract."

Investigators probably will wait until the birth of the child to conduct a paternity test and identify the father, said Skolnik, who would not say when the baby is due.

In 1997, the Legislature made it a felony for a person to engage in sex with a prisoner. Even if the act is consensual, the crime is punishable by up to four years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

A year after the bill's passage, a Clark County Detention Center corrections officer pleaded guilty to having sex with a female inmate.

Raymond Harts was accused of having inappropriate sexual relations with three inmates, one of whom said the officer raped her. Harts was sentenced to one year in prison for having consensual sex with one inmate.

Sexual relations between prison staff and inmates is nothing new, but the only known pregnancy occurred in 1975, Skolnik said, when a corrections officer at the Carson City prison impregnated an inmate.

Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada, said he thinks the state bears some responsibility for the woman's condition because they allowed a private company to manage the prison.

"I wish I could say I was surprised or that I believed this is an isolated incident, but the truth is these kinds of problems tend to be more prevalent at privatized correctional facilities," he said. "Private companies have a powerful incentive to cut corners to maximize profits. That means ... more poorly trained staff."

He said the woman could sue the state or Corrections Corp. because the sexual act occurred while she was incarcerated and in the care of the prison system.

"There is no such thing as consensual sex between inmates and staff in a jail or prison context," he said. "The buck stops at the state. That doesn't let the private company off the hook, but it does mean the state is also responsible for any malfeasance."