Josette Bickle – what a story
Josette Bickle, photographed by Darrin Zammit Lupi for timesofmalta.com
This is my column in The Malta Independent on Sunday, today.
The case of Josette Bickle has galvanised Malta. The story ticks all the right shock-horror boxes.
A woman goes to prison for dealing in heroin and while there continues her business, quite obviously with the collusion of those who are in charge because otherwise it would have been impossible.
She uses the power and money she gets through heroin, and I suspect uses also the influence she has outside the prison through her heroin network, to control the guards and bosses inside the prison.
And because she controls the guards and bosses, she has full control over her fellow prisoners, who are all women because prisoners are segregated, and who therefore succumb much more easily to her essentially alpha-male psyche.
Before the LGBT lobby jumps down my throat, I am not saying here that homosexual women are the equivalent of men – they know I know better than that. But this particular woman has an alpha-male personality and there is no denying that.
Had she been a man operating in the men’s prison, Josette Bickle would not have found the road clear, because she would have been challenged at various points over the years by other pairs of antlers. She would have been challenged even as the woman she is, had she been billetted with the men, and would have held her own.
But placed in a hive of submissive women, Josette Bickle found nothing in her way.
Her alpha-male persona helped her dominate and take advantage of those women in precisely the same way that alpha-men do, and this includes sex. And it’s here that her sexuality becomes relevant, because heterosexual women, no matter how domineering or sociopathic they might be, do not want other women near their private parts unless those other women are paid to provide a clinical service on an obstetrician’s couch, in a maternity ward, or at the beautician’s.
Bickle forced her fellow prisoners to shave her private parts and soap her in the shower, not because she couldn’t do these things for herself, but because they are exercises in humiliation and dominance, which create a master-slave relationship and perpetuate it. She wasn’t averse to using these stratagems because she derived sexual pleasure from them.
A heterosexual woman with the same personality would have used physical violence for control, not these falsely intimate services: hitting, pinching, pulling out clumps of hair and threats with boiling water – the way some women treat their maids in undemocratic societies where they are themselves constrained and restricted.
Josette Bickle’s case brings up an important issue that is well overdue for review. We have accepted the segregation of prisoners by gender without ever examining the original reason for it or considering whether it should be revisited.
Women are separated from men in prisons precisely to avoid situations of sexual predation or harassment, or consensual communion for that matter, and the tension and loss of dignity and privacy that these situations cause. There is no other reason.
It is the same reason that men and women have separate public lavatories, are searched by police officers and guards of the same gender, and so on. To have a woman strip-searched by a prison guard (or for that matter, an airport security guard) who is quite obviously homosexual defeats the underlying purpose.
She will feel as uncomfortable and deprived of her dignity as she would if strip-searched by a man. This has nothing to do with homophobia. Women who object to being strip-searched by men are not man-haters or lesbians. They’d just like to keep their dignity.
Back in the day when the rules were laid out the world over, nobody thought in terms of homosexuality. Lesbians were a fiction and gay men who ended up in prison were thought to be getting all they deserved in the shower and maybe that they actually enjoyed it or even posed a threat to the other prisoners who, so the thinking went, also deserved it.
Now we are supposed to be more enlightened.
We are supposed to know that putting a homosexual woman with an alpha male personality (this is the crucial detail, not the homosexuality itself, as it is this ‘alpha male’ trait which makes for predation) into a prison full of women is like putting a rooster among the chickens.
Josette Bickle is the textbook example of what happens. Life becomes hell for the chickens.
I do not use the farmyard metaphor to insult or denigrate prisoners but because it is highly illustrative (hence Animal Farm), a prison being much the same context as a coop.
The prison authorities put Josette Bickle into the women’s section because of her gender, and this despite the fact that she posed all the risk to the other women that segregation from the men is designed to avoid.
From what we read about Bickle, it is clear that she should have been placed with the men. The other women would have been saved from her predations and she would have been safe from those of the men, because there are no flies on this one and no one was going to risk trying it on.
I rather suspect, though, that in the men’s section Bickle would have seen another business opportunity over and above the heroin, and would not have been averse to using sex from which she derived no pleasure for even more control and money. The crucial difference there is that the men would have been willing participants, unless the women.
Perhaps there is no real solution to the problem of where to place somebody like Josette Bickle. Solitary confinement is fraught with human rights issues and is strictly speaking reserved only for the murderously insane.
Wherever she is placed, and she’s back in again now, there is one solution that cannot be avoided: people working on back-to-back shifts have to be detailed to watch her every move and report back. And those people must in turn be closely watched themselves.
Now that it is public knowledge just what a great risk she poses to others, and how weak the system is, there can be no more excuses.
The only way to control a person like that is to shift the balance of power against her. Her fellow prisoners have to be empowered so that they do not become her victims, and this from the first days of her re-entry to prison, so that she has no time to assert her dominance.
They have to be briefed to pull together against her, and they must be shown that they have the full backing of the prison guards and authority, without which they cannot hold Bickle off. She will divide and rule through all-round intimidation once more if this does not happen, and now that she faces another 12 years, she has even less to lose and will be taking bigger risks.
Prison is enough of a punishment without having to deal with somebody like Josette Bickle, adding to the already overwhelming stress of being deprived of your freedom.
34 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Brilliant article and insight.
An insightful article which however completely eschews the power of the lure of heroin to addicts and the protagonist’s wily use of her ability to ensure a steady supply of the stuff.
While agreeing with you that Bickle is no good to the well being of the other prisoners, I have to admit I still reserve a bit of empathy towards her.
Her life sounds like a horror story and must have contributed in no small part to the woman she is today. A childhood like hers must be so incredibly traumatic, we couldn’t even begin to comprehend it.
I hope she can be controlled for the benefit of all in prison, but I also hope she is given help to try and save whatever life might be left for her.
So who is accountable?
Isolating a dominant person from the group would only lead to the group establishing another alpha male and the same hierarchy. This is a fundamental law of nature which applies to all higher animals including humans and rats.
Researchers at the University of Nancy conducted this experiment. Six rats were placed in a cage connected by a tunnel to a box of food. The tunnel was filled with water, which meant that to get to the food, the rats would have to swim through the tunnel and back.
What happened next astonished the researchers. Within a short period of time, the rats divided the roles amongst themselves. Two rats would swim up to get the food, and on their return would be beaten by two exploiter rats who would not swim, but would wrestle the food away from exhausted swimmers.
One autonomous rat would be strong enough to swim and to manage to keep the food for itself, whilst the sixth rat would be too weak to swim or to flight. This sixth rat would be beaten by all five and would get only the smallest leftover morsels of food.
The same “division of labour” was observed in all other cages set up to repeat the experiment. But the most remarkable thing was yet to be discovered.
Next, the scientists took all exploiter rats and placed them into a separate cage. Astonishingly, within a few hours, the former exploiters divided themselves along the same hierarchy: two exploiters, two slave swimmers, one independent autonomous rat, and one outcast weakling beaten by all.
The same situation repeated itself in all other configurations: in a cage of former swimmers, former autonomous rats, former outcasts – all would invariably establish the same hierarchy.
Ah, but that’s rats, not people, some of you may say. Think again. All sorts of subtle variations of this informal hierarchy exist at schools, at the workplace, in prison, in the army and anywhere else where a relatively stable group of people is formed for a sufficiently long period of time.
Reading about Vaclav Havel’s death, I could not help myself but think about life in Malta over the past decades. Havel had a Velvet Revolution and a Velvet Divorce. Malta only had one revolution, and that happened after 1987. We did not kill off the nobles, we did not invent steam or remove a Politburo.
We were just latecomers to the economic boom in services and consumption. The island dug deep into consumerism, which changed completely the lifestyles of the Maltese. Before 1987, the difference between Labour’s mythical ‘haddiem’ and the rest was very much like two completely alien races.
One could never understand the other. The culture that bore the brunt of change in the 1960’s were the farmers – who back then were simple Catholic folk, always voting PN. Those who changed after 1987 were the factory work-hands, solid Labour territory.
Today the Church no longer has a mass of voters behind it, new priests are hard to come by, and the last referendum (the last two referendums if you want to nitpick) proved to be a massive victory for secularists.
And Labour had to change because of 1987 too. They did not really try until after 1992, which makes the narrow PN victory that year even more precious. And yet all Labour supporters today live differently, with a higher standard of living, in another cultural model and they have changed views on some important matters too.
That is why we should worry that Muscat called back all that pre-1987 riff-raff. They’re harking back to their Golden Years. What would our reaction be today, if the PN tomorrow woke up spouting Irredentismo and union with Italy, while declaring the Panzavecchia years glorious?
Sometimes I ask myself why The Times stopped publishing the number of new cars added every month, as it did back in the days. Now we complain there are too many cars, and that public transport reforms are bodged.
It’s this contradiction that the Labour Party accepted in the Sant years. It is that contradiction that is now festering with Muscat at the helm.
Today, I cannot imagine the likes of the Labour extremists throwing bombs and firing machine guns, then to come home and watch old runs of Prison Break (“Inti tarah Prisinnbrejjkk?”), wrestling or – God forgive me – Deceduti.
But, I can imagine the planners of those years back in the seat. And I can do that, because they are poised to get back there, soon.
Just look at the deafening silence from Mile End on the way Cameron handed in the British veto. Sceberras Trigona must be licking his lips.
With those mavericks in government, who can guarantee we will not have the Mintoff dream of ‘thirty-five nations led by one’ to haunt us again? Back in 1975, Mintoff blocked the Helsinki Accords while on one of his famous Mediterranean whims.
I’m not one for scaremongering, but I definitely do not want my country isolated just because the Labour crowd will choose a hack led by dinosaurs for Prime Minister. Muscat is one for posturing, and as a Labour leader, he can afford never to blink and be acclaimed as a Saviour. I cannot.
With the dinosaurs back in government, we will be thrown back into class war. The PN managed to turn that struggle on an economic plane: “Iss, dawk ghandhom 500€ f’ zieda.” Or “Il-gar ghandu farmhawsss Ghawdex…il-pampalun.” With Karmenu Vella, the Grima brothers and all the other Golden Boys back, we’ll be back to that old battlefield.
Snubbing a state dinner for some fries and a hamburger might have been the signal, but I suspect the bitter future ahead is already in the making. From the lack of general information on Labour’s plans, and the individuals picked to design and implement them, it is safe to suspect that a growth crisis will begin once the PL gets its hands on our livelihoods.
All this can happen over one PL term in government. I’m young, but I can still remember the difference between the PN in government and those 22 months of stagnation back in the mid-90s. I can only surmise as to the hell and limbo Malta was between 1971 and 1987.
Turn the clocks back to life in the early 80’s, just as the PL did in its leadership. It’s like taking a billionaire’s family and impoverish it overnight. I can imagine the loss in my own identity, to my own life.
It makes me angry to think that there still are madmen who want to take that risk, and throw the dice with their votes.
I wonder what the prison brass are getting in return for allowing narcotics inside the prison.
I wonder what the prison brass get for not allowing narcotics inside the prison.
It irks me no end that those who flagrantly abuse the human rights of others can still seek protection of human rights.
Solitary confinement is the only possible method of dealing with such an evil being, where she can do no more harm to anyone.
I think she should also be made to pay for her stay. She certainly has the means. Consider it rent for the business she ran from jail.
The only way to deal with someone like her would be to adopt a strict zero tolerance regime in her regard.
This is easier said than done in a small country like Malta.
Many people in authority are open to blackmail because of their connections, in one way or another, with the highly lucrative drug trade. Let’s be honest about this.
Almost everyone at the prisons (and also those above them) is within her power, or so it transpires from the evidence heard in court.
They will be the same people having to deal with her this time round.
The lady is a veritable master of the art of blackmail. She would have used her talents with Judge Michael Mallia if only he was within her reach. He most certainly was not.
She will be, once again, I am sorry to say, the de facto director of the Facilita’ Korrettiva Ta’ Kordin.
How come the prison director of that time has not been charged?
Why was Mr Felice ( prison board ) not heeded?
Why are not heads rolling, ministers resigning? Is nobody in this god forsaken country accountable?
Can you imagine what would happen in an other ‘democratic western country?
[Daphne – Like Italy, do you mean, where a law-breaking pervert gets to stay on as prime minister?]
Yes but not in Malta.
Authorities here are imune just like only mugs with salaried or wage paid people pay proper and up to the last cent tax. Tell me one instant were one was sent to prison or very heavily taxed here for tax avoidence.The powers think some of us are fools and we will believe that who is responsible for prisons or tax collecting is clean !
For once a very good article, congradulations and best wishes for Christmas and the New Year.
[Daphne – Ah I see. My posts are good or not depending on whether you agree with them on not. Forgive me for the fact that I am unable to be gracious here, but congratulations has a T.]
I spent over three terrible weeks in that prison in late1996, imprisoned by the then Labour government. (subsequently acquitted after trial)
During that time, I never witnessed any drug trafficking nor substance abuse.
What has changed? Possibly I was ‘sheltered’ from the ‘real’ reality by the prison authorities, being a foreigner who became high profile.
Is an independent inquiry required? Something smells here.
Labour. What a disASTer.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20111218/local/sceberras-trigona-in-sharp-exchanges-with-interviewer-in-pbs-programme.398945
Prosit.
This is out of subject but very interesting:
http://soundcloud.com/jinthecloud/ast
The siege mentality is still in the Labour Party, and AST like everyone else, judges by his standards.
The woman is patently amoral. All this psychobabble about alpha males and whatnot is rubbish. I wouldn’t go as far as saying it verges on the empathetic, because I don’t have any good quality and reliable info. It’s a grown up way of saying “Mummy they made me do it.”
Everybody knows what’s good and what isn’t. We’ve all got to step up to the plate and carry the consequences of our actions.
[Daphne – It’s not psychobabble, Reuben. Some people have dominant personalities and others do not. In some, that dominance is coupled with ruthlessness, and those people rise to the top in any ‘closed’ situation.]
I think it is a simple and natural human consequence that Bickle’s type, to a varying degree of ruthlessness of course, will come to the fore in any women’s prison; indeed in any situation wherein women are segregated for a period of time. I suspect her type would arise even in a nunnery.
Only the motives and methods would be different.
I guess in a perfect world the trick would be the correct rotation of prison staff and strict arbitrary supervisors.
But we don’t live in a perfect world, so I choose to look at this whole Bickle thing as an additional reason for not breaking the law and going to prison.
If you remove Bickle, the next best dominant woman will take the throne, so let’s not sympathize with the ‘subordinate’ inmates.
@ Li Ding,
Her type would ‘arise’ PARTICULARLY in a nunnery. As usual, Daphne was spot on in her assessment of this saga.
North Korea’s Jong has kicked the bucket. The ultimate Christmas present would for our own dear Dom to do the same and join the warm party with his friends Jong and Ghaddafi. No Mintoff, no party.
Hey Pecksniff,
I don’t agree. For the party to be a runaway hit, it needs to include Hugo Chavez and good old Fidel. What a party that would be.
One thing you fail to do in this article. Ask for the immediate resignation of “Justice and Home Affairs” Minister Karm Mifsud Bonnici. So, our prison system seems to be corrupt to the core, and no-one takes political responsibility. This country needs change. Yesterday rather than today.
[Daphne – I don’t think he should resign. Odd that you should set such high standards for this government, but then voted for KMB’s to stay in situ. I can’t take anything you say seriously, Albert. It’s too difficult.]
But I’m sure there is a better way of controlling her situation. Maybe not full on solitary confinement, but very limited access to other inmates. I can;t understand for the life of me how this sort of thing is allowed, although I also can’t say I know how I’d resolve it.
And I understand what you mean about homosexual people in prison, although I hope you’re not suggesting segregating inmates based on their sexual orientation because aside from being morally questionable, it’s also impractical.
Another of Mintoff’s friends, who came to study at the University of Malta as Mintoff’s guest, has bitten the dust.
I’m sure Gaddafi, Kim Jong-il and Mintoff are going to have great times sharing war stories in hell when Mintoff finally joins them.
Good riddance.
What a trio!
Double punishment, being locked in a prison with such a bully around.
Will you be writing a column or an article about Kim Jong-Il, Daphne?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20111219/local/lou-bondi-found-guilty-of-character-assasination.399159
I pity those women who have testified against her. I hope that they have some kind of protection if they are still in jail.
All this mess to stop people from putting stuff in their own bodies.
Very good piece, though.
[Daphne – Laws on illegal drugs are not designed to stop people putting stuff in their own bodies. They’re designed to avoid the costs and social damage of having other people clear up the resulting mess. It is the same reasoning which gives us laws on seat-belts in cars and crash helmets on motor-bikes. In countries where people are free to take as many drugs as they please, you will generally find that it’s because there is no obligation for anyone else to mop up afterwards, or pay for it. In Malta, the social cost is paid by the welfare state and volunteer organisations, and there is a cost paid also by those who are robbed by desperate drug addicts.]
Illegal drugs are illegal because, unlike alcohol, tabacco, junk food and dangerous sport, they’re not approved of by the general population.
And in order to ‘protect our children’.
The economic and social costs you suggest would conceivably be less if drug prohibition were to be lifted, though no legislator has ever bothered to quantify these costs either way – talk about fact-based policy!
In any case, the welfare state – which I think is a good thing to have – shouldn’t be used as an excuse to curb individual liberty or to replace personal and parental responsibility. Voluntary organisations are something else altogether.
Incidentally, I think seat-belt and crash helmet laws are illiberal too.
[Daphne – The thinking which underpins all democracies, Julian, is that the right to swing your fist ends where another man’s nose begins.]
…or, said otherwise, live and let live.
Daphne… Nothing to do with this case but I would like to add just one more comment.
Each human person always stores an amount of homosexuality within them even when they are predominantly heterosexual.
This homosexuality is mostly used in emergency cases and is widely practiced by both sexes in prisons and amongst mono sexual communities.
Oh….and just one thing there are also bisexuals.
Happy Christmas to you and your family and keep up the great blog.
What a load of tripe.