Opinion: The Actions of ADOC are Not Solving the Current Problems that ADOC is Plagued By

man behind barsPhoto byHarry SheltononUnsplash

If you had any say at all over who gets granted parole and who doesn't in a state that currently houses over 24,000 inmates within facilities that have a maximum capacity of roughly 11,000, don't you think you make it a priority to start releasing all inmates who are able to be housed in minimum security or work release and come up for a parole hearing? Well, that is definitely not what they are doing.

ADOC's Lightest Level Security

According to ADOC's website, there are several terms for how they classify inmate housing. This is from their website:

• Minimum: The lowest custody designation an inmate can receive. In general, Minimum custody inmates are conforming to ADOC rules and regulations. There are three levels of Minimum custody, and they are as follows:
• • Minimum-community: This custody level is appropriate for those inmates who have demonstrated the ability to adjust to semi-structured environment and/or those inmates who are nearing the end of their incarceration in order to transition and reintegrate back into the community. Inmates in this custody are allowed gainful employment in the community on a full-time basis and will be supervised in community based facilities when not working.
  • Minimum-out: Appropriate for inmates that do not pose a significant risk to self or others and suitable to be assigned off-property work details without the direct supervision of correctional officers. Inmates must remain in prison clothing at all times and work is generally assigned to only government positions (i.e. city, county, ADOC, ADOT, etc.).Inmates in this custody are generally assigned to Community Work Centers (CWC) with higher security facilities only maintain a small number of job assignments requiring minimal supervision.
  • Minimum-in: Appropriate for inmates who do not pose a significant risk to self or others within the confines of the institution. Work assignments must be on-property at a minimum, medium, or close security facility and may be supervised by non-security personnel with the express approval of the Warden/designee.

Those are absolutely the type of inmates that sound like they would be granted parole, correct? I thought so, too. Instead, I found out that between the two most recent parole hearing dates set this month on January 23 and the 24th, they denied parole for several inmates housed in one of the three minimum security housing.

Maintaining a prison system is undoubtedly a headache and a half with lots of help for many people. Judging by Alabama's handling of its prison system, they are in need of some help when it comes to managing, maintaining, and securing each of the old run-down facilities. They also, apparently, need help with the parole hearings. There have been a total of 8 parole hearings so far this year, and out of just the last two parole hearings, there were at least 14 inmates housed at minimum security status who were denied parole.

On January 23, 2024, the ADOC parole/and pardon hearing had at least 28 parole hearings come up. However, of those cases, only one or two were granted parole. On January 24, 2024, the ADOC parole and pardon hearing heard 25 parole hearings and granted only four of them.

So that makes 46 or so inmate parole hearings that were just denied and set off to, in some cases, dates as far out as 2029. I'm saying that is crazy if you consider all the problems being caused by overpopulation alone. They could solve half their problems and make things so much easier on themselves by actually using the parole system the way it was intended.

If inmates can be trusted enough to be housed in minimum security, then they sound like prime candidates for parole. Why is ADOC continuing to punish themselves? I found 14 inmates who came up for parole and are housed in a minimum security facility. If they actually paroled out any inmates deemed "not a risk" enough to allow them to get outside jobs, then maybe they could get somewhere with correcting the problems that are making more and bigger problems.

Why Weren't These Inmates Granted Parole?

In this case, Malcom Jamal Peyton, is a prime example of what I want to draw attention to. I don't understand why not release him on parole a little earlier than his intended release date. It's a nonviolent crime, his in Min-In, and ADOC is more than 160% past their threshold for quantity of prisoners their facilities can constitutionally contain.

Inmate ProfilePhoto byADOC

Another inmate denied parole for, some may say, an obvious reason. Well, I say look at the amount of time the man has put into serving his time. The man has managed to do the best he can with what's given. If his sentence permits parole, then by all means why not use it to give someone a second chance.

inmate profilePhoto byADOC

This next inmate is another one leaving me scratching my head wondering why ADOC officials would rather keep the prisons unsupervised, unsafe, unclean, and overpopulated than to allow this man to leave just little early.

Inmate profilePhoto byADOC

Here's another few who should have been granted parole.

Inmate profilePhoto byADOC

Inmate profilePhoto byADOC

What are you doing ADOC? I mean really. What is the end game? This parole issue is not new and many people are aware of it so why does the progress seem to be in moving in the wrong direction.

Thanks for reading! Let me know your thoughts in the comments. If you don't already have the NewsBreak App, you can download it here!

You can follow me on 𝕏 @PressRealz for more content.

Got a tip for a story? Let me know by email at newsbreakcontributor@gmail.com. Do you think you have what it takes to become a contributor? Join here and get started telling your own stories.