Okla. Flag
Okla. Flag

Jess Dunn Prison
Jess Dunn Correctional Prison"



This type of methodology makes use of both statistical calculations as well as (limited) head counts to derive an answer.

From section 4.2 and 4.3 we know the following:
That 80.5% of ALL (nationwide) prisoners incarcerated under state authority, are there (at least in part) for some sort of drug offence.   ---- However, this statistical figure (as tabulated, and statistically being used by the Fed’s) depends on classifying Alcohol as a drug and placing it along side Heroin etc.   Something to which many of us can agree is not proper.

That (assuming “Alcohol the Drug” is taken out of the equation), 44.4% of ALL (nationwide) prisoners are there (at least in part) for some sort of drug offence.
From physical head counts, Oklahoma has approximately 12,052 prisoners presently being incarcerated (at least in part) for some sort of drug offence.   --- Thus mathematically as the total prison population of Oklahoma is 26,642, that would mean that

        [ 12,052 / 26,642 = 0.4537 ]

Or that 45.37% of our total state prison population are in there (at least in part) for some sort of drug offence.   --- Which is extremely close to the (nation-wide) statistically calculated figure of 44.4%.

NOTE: As has already been shown, Federal (“Nation-Wide) Statistics OFFICIALLY ONLY LIST'S 20% of ALL state prisoners as being under incarceration for Drugs.   While the State of Oklahoma officially lists the figure as ONLY being 28% [12]     Yet our physical head count tabulation is over 45%?   ----- A statistical mistake; -----   Well actually no.   What they are actually doing, and how they’ve been able to get away with it for so long, is through the “Statistical-Slight-Of-Hand” tool of classifying prisoners according to the “Highest Level of Crime” committed.   Thus a person defending his Medical Marihuana plants might be classified as a violent offender instead of a Medical Cannabis patient, etc.

Of this CDS” figure of 12, 052 prisoners presently incarcerated for drug crimes (as at least one of their offenses), only 5,554 of them have identifying drugs associated with them.   That is to say that we have a pretty good idea as to what specific drug they are being incarcerated for.   The rest (6,498 prisoners by physical count) are simply listed in the raw data as being in prison (at least in part) for a C.D.S.   which stands for “CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE.” --- Translation WE DON’T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT DRUG they are being held in jail for?   (Think of it as one of those mysteries of life that the narcotics police so dearly are in love with.)

From the 5,554 CDS prisoners whose substance has been identified, we have been able to isolate (by head count) 1,834 prisoners (6.89% of the total prison population) doing time (at least in part) for Marihuana.   --- Of these approximately one-third (1/3) are there SOLELY for Marihuana related crimes.   That is to say that if Marihuana were NOT against the law, the rest of the crimes they were charged with would also not have been against the law.   The rest are there for multiple offenses for which marihuana was but one of them.

NOTE that mathematically, that means that

        [1,834 / 5,554 = 0.33 ]

33% of ALL identified drug offenders are being incarcerated (at least in part) for MARIHUANA.

If we were to make the assumption that this figure were also (statistically) representative of ALL CDS prisoners then we can logically assume that statistically 33% of ALL the un-identified CDS prisoners are also in there (at least partially) for Marihuana.   A figure that is

        [6,498 x .33 = 2,146 ]

Meaning that within the un-identified CDS prisoners, we should be able to locate approximately 2,146 individuals there (at least in part) for Marihuana related offences.

That if we were to add the two figures (2,146 from the un-known and the 1,834 from the known drug offenders list.   That figure would come out to:

        [2,146 + 1,834 = 3,980 ]

3,980 Oklahoma prisoners presently being incarcerated, with Marihuana being at least one of their offences.

NOTE THAT THIS IS VERY CLOSE TO THE NUMBER “4,262” THAT WAS OBTAINED VIA OUR FIRST (strictly mathematical) methodology.   (Thus giving us confidence that our math is on the right track)

ALSO NOTE that if 1/3 of the known marihuana prisoners are there solely for Marihuana related crimes, that (if our assumption of corresponding statistical sameness is correct) that therefore 1/3 of ALL Marihuana prisoners are there solely for Marihuana related crimes.   Thus:

        [ 1/3 x 3,980 = 1,326 ]

technically 1,326 prisoners could be releasable tomorrow -- were Medical Cannabis legalized today.

*NOTE, some of these are actually listed as DUI’s, but due to various other factors lead us to assume that alcohol was NOT the CDS in question.   Also note that the actual figure tabulated is actually a bit shy of "1,326", but it is close enough and keeps the math we are doing here as simple as possible.

As noted previously, Oklahoma (as of Feb 24, 2014) had approximately 26,642 prisoners incarcerated under state authority.   Of this figure, approximately 5% are presently under incarceration SOLELY FOR MARIHUANA or Marihuana related crimes.   That is to say that none of their crimes would have been illegal had Marihuana itself not have been illegal in the first place.   – That is a figure equal to 1,332 prisoners.   AND an additional 11% (again of the total prison population) are also presently under incarceration (at least in part) for Marihuana.   That is to say that Marihuana was one of the alleged crimes illegally committed.   – That is a figure equal to an additional 2,931 prisoners.

In other words 16% of our entire state prison population is effectively under incarceration (either in whole or in part) for some sort of Marihuana offense.   And while most of us automatically know exactly what a Marihuana prisoner is or is not.   Here (because of the financial nature of the subject), it would be prudent to delve more fully into those assumptions used by this report to determine just who is who.

Before we delve into these presumptions, we should give the reader a STRONG WORD OF WARNING --- It’s easy to work with pure statistics, but it’s not so easy to work with the reality.   OK, simply put, some of these people are not (ah) what we will call, 'the seven beauties', if you know what I mean.   Example, while going through some of these prison records, it was noted that more than one individual had used marihuana as a means of luring young people into their apartments and . . . maybe what follows should be left unsaid.

To quote the Rev. Robert Divine: [13]
“After listening to such a sordid story . . . I felt that I needed to wash out my ears and eyes; indeed my whole being cried aloud for an internal bath.”
The irony being that these young people (although the victims) were in many cases too afraid to come forward.   The result of our present day drug law system, after all, hadn’t the youngsters themselves violated the law and so wouldn’t they too end up behind lock bars.   And thus molesters are able to get away with it; -- and we repeat, we’ve found more than one individual who was getting away with it for quite some time.   Then, on the other hand, other cases were noted where it is beyond conception how the either judges and prosecutors could stand to look themselves in the mirror after trying some of these cases.   And if there is justice in this world, they themselves should be sent to the same prisons where they are now sending their victims.   --- Simply put, if you plan on going into the actual records for yourself, * make sure that you have a strong stomach and be prepared to swallow and bear it.

Because this report deals solely with financial aspects of Marihuana incarceration, we are forced to view the prison population, NOT AS HUMAN BEINGS, but solely as statistical numbers.   This or that percentage of our prison population is being incarcerated for Marihuana.   Then, taking that figure; simply multiply it by the amount it’s costing us to incarcerate each state prisoner per year; -- End of story.

However (even ignoring the human rights aspects of the situation), the situation is somewhat more complex than just that.   As the reader may have already asserted, not ALL Marihuana Offenders are presently under incarceration SOLELY for the Marihuana.   And others are way out in what we can only term, La-La-Land.

Which is why this report has been forced to list (at least) some of it’s numerical presumption that were used creating the mathematical tabulations.
    This grouping consists of those prisoners being incarcerated solely for Marihuana possession or only for Marihuana related crimes.   Meaning that if the Marihuana of-and-of-itself had not been against the law in the first place then the other “associated crimes” such as possession of drug paraphernalia, etc., would also not have been crimes.
    FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY: Because (by definition), we are tabulating the costs of incarcerating Marihuana prisoners, thus each prisoner therefore is counted as a whole prisoner or someone who is costing us a total of $15,167 per year to incarcerate.

    This grouping consists of those prisoners who are being incarcerated for multiple offenses, some of which had nothing to do with Marihuana.   In other words, these people would in most cases still be under incarceration even if marihuana were fully legal.   HOWEVER, as Marihuana WAS one of their offenses (being they are serving some period of time for it), for economic reasons they must still be counted in some way.
    FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY: There are those who claim that if Marihuana had anything to do with a prisoner being sentenced then that person is in for Marihuana period and should be counted completely as such.   Then there are others who feel that the prisoner is in there for other offenses and as such should be totally ignored.   But most feel that as multiple crimes were involved, that some kind of percentage formula should be used to determine that prisoner’s status.   Example; if a prisoner is doing time for (let’s say, Medical Marihuana, and a prescription pain killer) then logic and reason dictate that (for financial purposes) this individual should be seen as the equivalent of only one-half of a normal prisoner.   Or someone who is costing us [$15,167 / 2 = ] $7,585 to incarcerate for Marihuana.

    However, what if that prisoner had committed nine other multiple offenses instead on just two, logic and reason dictate that in this case, that individual should only be seen costing us [$15,167 / 10 = ] $1,517 to incarcerate for Marihuana.   And so on and so on.   BUT here we run into a major problem.   While the most accuracy would be obtained by simply going through each and every prisoner records and doing an individualized tabulation, shear-volume and the numbers involved make that all but impossible.   Thus, by necessity we have been forced to generalize all such prisoners as being only one-fourth of a normal prisoner -- Meaning that for economic purposes, each multiple offender will be seen as costing us

            [$15,167 / 4 = ] $3,792

    Note here that the one-fourth figure was not chosen arbitrarily but gauged according to the general prison records.   Simply put, it appears that the average “Multiple Offender” who along with being arrested for Marihuana was also arrested for three other unrelated crimes.

    For the purposes of this report, an escaped Marihuana prisoner (who is not incarcerated at the present time) is for costing purposes counted as costing us only one-tenth of a prisoner.

            [$15,167 / 10 = ] $1,517

    WHY?   While it is true that s/he is not actually using a prison bed, nor eating prison food, still the escapee is using up administrative time as well as other prison paper work functions.

    Larry E Yarbrough (ODOC# 125218) is serving a (Three Strikes And You’re Out) prison sentence of “Life Without Possibility of Parole” for a CDS offence.   AND ONE of those three strikes and you’re out is for MARIHUANA.   --- In other words were it NOT for that marihuana conviction . . . . and it should be noted that ALL three convictions were for very minor offenses.   So is Mr. Yarbrough a Marihuana prisoner or not?
    FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY: For the purposes of this report, Mr. Yarbrough (and others like him) are being tabulated as costing us one-third of a normal.

            [$15,167 / 3 = ] $5,056

    WHY?   If we are to remain consistent with our definition of “Marihuana Related Crimes”, meaning that if Marihuana were NOT against the law, then we must ask ourselves;   Would Mr. Yarbrough be in this (three strikes & you're out) situation were it not for his conviction for Marihuana.   Obviously he would not, thus in effect making him a Marihuana prisoner.   However, as (nine times out of ten) as these three strike offenders usually are there for multiple offences, then they can only be counted as such.

  • DEATH – (While Serving A Prison Term):
    This takes place when a prisoner simply dies while in custody.
    FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY: None because (and while this sounds a bit ghoulish, it’s just a simple fact that dead people (other than some minor paperwork) require no bedding, food costs, etc.

    For our purposes (although a synthetic could be a lot of things), we are almost exclusively talking about a plant that is a substitute for Marihuana.
    FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY: For the purposes of this report we are counting synthetic substances as being equivalent to actual Marihuana.   WHY? Here we must ask ourselves the question; If Marihuana were not against the law, would these fools be using this other stuff?

    Many of us would not consider a DUI as being a victimless crime.   However, there have been several scientific studies showing that Marihuana (in the quantities used by medical patients) simply DOES NOT EFFECT ones ability to drive a motor vehicle safety; -- Thus can a DUI (under the influence of Marihuana) actually even take place?   An interesting question, however, this report is not the place to enter into discussion on the subject.   Here we are simply pointing out that as the state has no scientific facts to back up its DUI claims, and as such we must therefore view the matter solely as a Marihuana arrest and nothing more.
    FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY: Therefore for costing purposes, this report treats Marihuana DUI drivers as being a whole prisoner. [14]
Thus (as can be seen from the above costing/counting factors), there are many variables to which (depending on ones assumptions), can greatly influence the statistical calculations.   For the explained reasons we have chosen to use the stated numerical

* We are trying to make our data-files available to anyone interested, and encourage them to look into the figures for themselves.   So feel free to request these files, they can be sent to you via email in electronic (Excel) format.

  1. As tabulated in section 4.1, the average costs of incarcerating a prisoner (here in Oklahoma) is approximately $15,167 per year.
  2. As tabulated in previous sections:
    (1,332 full time Marihuana prisoners) x $15,167 = $20,202,444
    (2,931 partial Marihuana prisoners divided by four) = 733 x $15,167 = $11,112,178
    Thus the total costs of prisoner maintenance is equal to $31,314,622
THUS we can make the assumption that (using our previously-to described presumptions, that the physical costs of incarcerating State prisons for Marihuana is (more about) 35 Million dollars per year.   However, there are OTHER COSTING FACTORS (or residual costs) that we must also look into.

As an aside, note there that if one were to define anyone and everyone doing jail time for Marihuana that the above figure would be calculated as:
        (1,332 + 2,931 ) x $15,167 = $64,656,921

Which throws everything off the financial scales.

[12]-   As per Department of Corrections Annual Report for the year 2012, page 8
[13]-   The Moloch Of Marihuana (1945 version) By ROBERT JAMES DEVINE, this is a Reefer Madness Era classic. Here the quotation is being taken out of context but its basic concept was kept intact.
[14]-   See Department of Transportation studies, DOT-HS-808-078 and DOT-HS-808-065, which clearly bring the issue of Marihuana and driving safety to a close.