ISCC STAFF CONDUCTING "SQUAWKY" CHECKS REALIZING RESTRICTIONS ON COMMISSARY ITEM SALES ARE NOT WORKING

##########

NOTE: I am familiar with the information presented below not from having participated in illegal or prohibited activities myself, but from having worked in an area of the ISCC for 2 years where the brew was created, discovered and confiscated virtually every day by staff who often discussed these issues in my presence, as well as current activities and conversations with and between officers. Further, some of my family are or have been moonshiners in and around Harlan County Kentucky, and have been for generations, so the process is not a secret.
##########

In the past two weeks, teams of guards at the ISCC have conducted hundreds (if not thousands) of searches of prisoner housing and common areas for the ever-present (and referred to by its racially insensitive nickname) "squawky" - i.e., homemade alcohol, also known in other parts of the country as "hooch", "pruno" and "toilet whisky" (the latter because prisoners were known to hide their brew in their toilets). In the buildup to Superbowl Sunday, the focus on the brew has netted untold gallons of the stuff.

Ingredients for the brew, usually consisting of fresh fruit (often apples or oranges), sugar, bread (for its residual yeast content) and water (or juice), are mixed together and allowed to ferment for several days in a warm, dark place. This is very similar to the method of making "mash" used in the production of (pre-distilled) moonshine. Sometimes prisoners will flavor the mash with powdered drink mix to make it palatable, as once the yeast has eaten all the available sugars (known as "worked off"), the mash becomes bitter.

As one might imagine, due to the fermentation process, there is a distinctive smell associated with the fermenting ingredients, and if the container in which the fermenting brew is kept is completely sealed (like in a soda bottle) and pressure is not occasionally relieved, it can build internal pressure to the point it explodes. Staff who are the most successful in routinely ferreting out these stashes simply use their nose when entering an area to smell the off-gassing of the product.

In an effort to stem the flow of the brew, IDOC administrators (according to Keefe Commissary emails) have discontinued or severely restricted the sale of sugar, candies and other items containing sucrose (sugar). They've also gone to selling "sugar-free" honey (whatever chemical nightmare that might be...), replaced sugar packets served with meals with sugar substitute (associated with known carcinogens) and taken other actions which are nothing more than knee-jerk reactions to a serious problem.

Based on the fact that the making, selling and consumption of the brew has remained steady at the ISCC, and has seemingly increased since the implementation of these commissary restrictions (according to staff), the idea that restricting products containing sugar is the key to solving the problem is obviously not the answer. Further, had administrators truly thought restricting sugar was the solution (and the restrictions weren't just for show or for some financial interest), all items containing sugar would have been eliminated from diet and commissary menus.

First, making a fermented brew (mash) does not require "extra" sugar to be added as virtually any fruit and/or vegetable material contains sugars that when exposed to natural yeast in the air, can produce alcohol. Extra sugar does increase the amount of "food" available for the yeast to "eat" (which is then broken down into carbon dioxide and alcohol quicker than without the added sugar), but that happens naturally over time anyway. Ever see a drunk squirrel after having eaten fermented fruit dropped from a tree? Guaranteed that squirrel didn't put sugar, fruit and bread in a container for several days and hide it in a tree to get a buzz on.

Having inebriated prisoners is not in the best interest of the security of the facility, staff or prisoners but ironically enough, not all of the brew being made isn't so much an issue of getting drunk, but simply a challenge to authority - a game if you will - to be played with staff... something to do. With the discontinuation of (desirable) television channels, disparate treatment of "privileged" prisoners and lack of incentives, there seems to be no reason for many prisoners NOT to take the chance of doing things which are clearly rule violations, as the "reward" (as it were) far outweighs what more might be lost.

Some prisoners volunteer (or are sometimes forced) to "hold" a stash of brew for others, sometimes for financial gain, a cut of the final product, "putting in work" for a gang, or Just Because. One former death row prisoner housed at the IMSI was caught with a 3.5 ounce bottle of "squawky". He told staff he was using it to deep clean his hair. Unfortunately for him, whether the product was being used in his hair, or to drink - or whether he had one ounce or twenty gallons - the punishment would be the same. He has since been executed (no, not because of the mash...).

I don't have an answer to the problem, but removing incentives (e.g., TV stations), thereby making no difference whether one receives punishment or not (property restriction or segregation no longer matter, and because commissary is now so limited and items are always out of stock, commissary restriction doesn't matter either) can't be the answer.

Try some incentives, and not just for the inmate "pets" that receive all the special dispensations. It might just fix a few of the issues. Might not, but you don't know until you try, and it doesn't cost you a thing.