|
|
| Prison Guard Must Pay for Sex With an Inmate |
| By courthousenews.com - JACK BOUBOUSHIAN |
| Published: 08/05/2011 |
|
A woman can keep the $73,700 award from a jury that found she was coerced into sex with a prison guard up to 100 times while serving time, a Boston federal judge ruled. Former South Middlesex Correctional Center guard Moises Ballista was convicted of sexual relations with an inmate, a crime under Massachusetts law. Though inmates had reported witnessing sexual misconduct between guards and inmates as early as May 2003, the prison did not make an effort to stop the misconduct until July 2004, at which point Ballista was suspended. He had 50 to 100 sexual encounters with Christina Chao over the course of a year while she was incarcerated at the Framingham, Ma., facility, court records show. Chao brought a section 1983 civil rights suit against Ballista and prison officials after she was released from prison. A jury awarded her more than $73,000 in damages for Ballista's intentional infliction of emotional distress and infliction of cruel and unusual punishment under both the federal and Massachusetts constitutions. It also held prison superintendent Kelly Ryan liable for violating Chao's Eighth Amendment rights, but that the conduct was not willful. Ballista and Ryan moved for a directed verdict on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient, that consensual sex between a guard and an inmate is not a violation of the Eighth Amendment, and, in Ryan's case, on the grounds of qualified immunity. U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner rejected the motions last week, defending the jury's finding that Chao had not consented. "Sex in prison is a complex and risky phenomenon," Gertner wrote. "'Consent' is not easy to determine amidst the power dynamics between male captors and female inmates. The analysis is contextual - and for the fact finder." The 40-page decision focuses on the sufficiency of the evidence at trial. "Where, as here, the 'relationship' between this inmate and her captor took place over the course of a year, where virtually every encounter was one sided female-on-male fellatio, where he sometimes woke her up the middle of the night to 'service him, the jury could reasonably find that the conduct rose to the level required to constitute a violation of the Eighth Amendment," Gertner wrote. Though "any intercourse or oral sex" will not necessarily violate the Eighth Amendment as a matter of law, Gertner said she neither found "that voluntary sex may never violate the Eighth Amendment." "The case against Ballista could not have been more straightforward," according to the ruling. "He confessed to her that he was abusing his authority and taking advantage of her. He knew of her personal background, and yet he engaged in this conduct anyway." "Like many female inmates, Chao was a victim of sexual abuse both as a child and as an adult," Gertner added. She also pointed out that Ryan testified that "upwards of sixty percent of female inmates are on psychotropic medication." Ryan had claimed she is entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutionality of consensual sex between guards and inmates was not "clearly established" when the events occurred. Gertner was not convinced. Read More. |
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think