This is my review of the documentary on the Attica Prison Riot from the video "The 20th Century with Mike Wallace: Uprising at Attica" (1996). The review was an assignment for Criminal Justice Management CJ3020, but gave me a chance to see how the riot was handled and the views from those who were there and compare that with modern training in policing and critical incident response.

1. Randy Higley 02‐20‐10
CJ3020 – Chabries
Review of Uprising at Attica. The 20th
Century with Mike Wallace. New York : History Channel
(1996).
This video by Mike Wallace presents a story of the Attica Prison Riot from a quite liberal point
of view. Only one modern interview of a prison guard was presented in a mostly negative point
of view of the decisions made. There were no direct points made of any good actions or
decisions made by those involved by Wallace. The riot occurred during a time of change, which
had not made it to every corner of the country. The handling of the Attica riot shows what
happens when traditional ideas and reform ideas, are forced together with no planning, and
with decisions being made by one set of ideals and being implemented by those with the other
ideals. The resulting outcomes are problems in both, with each side holding that the other is
wrong, and the prisoners able to take advantage of the holes and gaps that result between the
ideals. Then in the end the traditional actions are held up to the views of reform and exposed
to the public after the emotions of all involved are heightened to the point where they are
looking for who to blame.
1. What initially contributed to the riot?‐‐What could management have done that may have
prevented the riot from occurring in the first place?
Contributing circumstances of the riot include overcrowding of the prison, a largely white guard
population coming from the rural area around the prison, and a largely black and Hispanic
prison population coming from the inner city. The spark that set off the riot started as a minor
scuffle between two inmates the evening before. The next day word spread that the guards had
roughed up the inmates during the night, which set off the riot. One of the inmates states in
the video, “That morning when we came out [daily release of prisoners for the yard] we
decided we weren’t going to take it anymore.”
Management needed to work on the overcrowding of the prison, the racial tension between
guards and inmates, and the animosity between prisoners and guards. They also needed to
update the prison building and the systems in which it was ran to try to prevent the riot from
happening. The fact that a bolt holding a security gate broke under the prisoner’s attack, which
allowed them access to other parts of the building, shows that the hardware and structure was
in much need of repair.
2. What was the warden's initial strategy to respond to the riot? From a management
perspective, was the initial plan of the warden a good one?

2. The warden used state troopers to aid in retaking the prison. Sharpshooters were posted on
the roof tops with rifles. The troopers were organizing into armed 5‐man teams to make entry
and meet force with force to retake the prison.
The initial strategy helped contain the riot, which was good. The use of armed 5‐man teams to
enter and act like units was very much military like. The force used would more than likely
been deemed excessive. The use of teams in the open yard area more than likely would have
resulted in a few of the 5‐man teams being overrun by the prisoners who outnumbered the
troopers and their firearms taken for use by the prisoners.
This tactic would be a poor tactic as the yard was large and as the teams moved around they
would not be able to maintain contact with everyone. The militant prisoners might be able to
organize enough resistance to use this separation to overpower the troopers and take them
hostage as well. The 5‐man teams may be able to be used in the halls on the interior of the
prison were the teams may be able to use the reduced size of the interior to take smaller areas
back under control and retake prisoners in smaller more manageable groups.
A larger force needed with tactics more like field force, for street riots, without the shotguns, to
enter and push the prisoners back into the prison and into more controlled areas. Or to isolate
smaller groups with more man power, taking them back into custody and removing them from
the yard and into other controlled prison areas or away to other jails or prisons.
3. Describe the strengths and weaknesses of Commissioner Oswald's strategy. Describe his
management style (identify a specific management style—see textbook, icons on homepage)
and provide your assessment of his conduct during this riot.
Commissioner Oswald’s strengths include he was able to get the prisoners to begin talking to
him immediately and was able to continue to have the prisoners talk to him. He initiated
contact with the media and tried to have a working relation with them.
However Oswald’s weaknesses out weighted his strengths. The video did not go into detail of
Oswald’s taking over of the situation, but the impression was that it was immediate and
complete since no further mention of the warden’s involvement, serves to emasculate the
warden to future decisions with his personnel and the prisoner. Oswald could have used the
warden to enact some of the decisions, aid in the decision making due to his knowledge of the
prison layout and the prisoner population, and maintain him as someone who was important to
the prison operation now and in the future.
Oswald’s quick removal of the sharpshooters from the roof, without using their removal as a
negotiating point, or moving them or others first into the interior upper most levels/windows of
the prison removes a strong surveillance tool, a strong show of force by the prison, and
important cover for future tactical operations.

3. He brought media too far into the problem. He allowed them open contact with the prisoners,
which would serve to empower the prisoners to their cause, and provide potentially more
hostages and greater liability for endangering them. The media also serve as a stimulus and an
audience to keep the emotions of the prisoners high, and re‐agitate them as they become tired.
Without this constant re‐agitation it would have been easier to wear down the prisoners by just
waiting and it would be easier to get them back under control. He should have maintained
them in a media area for updates and briefs of the status, but erred by allowing them so much
access.
The same is true of the civil rights attorneys and activist. By bringing them into the prison, and
allowed free movement with the prisoners they serve to further agitate and keep the prisoner
emotions high. They then contacted the media providing their own slant to what was going on
without any controls or verification of facts.
His own entry into the prison also served to endanger himself and expose himself to being
taken prisoner, further aggravating the situation and posing a problem of no after action review
by someone in power over him who specialized in prisons.
I would gage his management style as Contingency. Since he was not a traditionalist like the
warden, but was known as a prison reformer. It was hard to tell from the video, but he also did
not seem to be concerned with the carrier path of others or by high production, or concerned
for the safety of himself or the others he took into the prison with him.
Since he was known as a prison reformer and was put into his position for that he must have
done well in his reformation of other prisons, but his management of the prison riot, was very
poor. His immediate actions of taking away possible force and intelligence options, without
first installing backup systems for each, and without using the removal as a negotiating point
left little for him to use later. Also since he was a prison reformer many of the prisoner
requests were agreed to too quickly, without requesting release of hostages or other
concessions from the prisoners.
The video made no mention of secondary plans being put in place by Oswald, for aiding the
hostages, for retaking sections of the inter of the prison, or trying to cordon of sections of the
yard to reduce the movement or make retaking it easier. His main concern was to negotiate
with the prisoners, which he gave up to much, too fast, and arguing the last points until the last
day without making other plans for retaking the prison, or planning the assault on the prison
with appropriate arms or other force options, or appropriate manpower.
The assault was done with shotguns and buckshot. Though the video states rifles were used,
none of the firearms I seen in the video were rifles. The assault appeared rushed and
unplanned. The firing I seen was from too far away to be able to control the proper target
selection, with the weapon systems used, and it those shots taken from the officers on the
catwalk was though smoke and at distances that the weapons and ammo used would not have
been able to target single target accuracy.

4.
4. Describe management's strengths and weaknesses in how they handled the riot aftermath.
Include your impressions about how the situation was managed with the media and with the
inmates after the riot was under control.
Management was unable to control the flow of information coming out to the media, and
information was not verified before the release. Information was later countered by others in
the coroner’s office or by the media. They tried to prove their initial information of the reports
of the hostages having their throats slashed with a single account of one guard who did have his
throat cut.
The hostages families were out in a common area with the media, troopers and other support
members wandering around, with notifications to the hostage’s family in this same open area
in this large group, then they are allowed to leave by their own means in a rush and full of
emotions.
The media was left to contact anyone they could for information. Those they did talk too did
not have any information, there was no communication between the agencies involved, and
the one media contact was telling the media to contact the other agencies about their
involvement in the prisons riot instead of working with them or taking charge of the
information release for the operation instead of throwing the other agencies to the wolves
after needing their help.
The inmates were abused and forced to go crawl through the yard, and administrative
punishment by the hands of the troopers and the guards after the prison was retaken. Not only
does this violate their civil rights, but it counters the promises Oswald made during his
negotiations and undermining any future contact with him and the prisoners.
5. Describe specifically the management style (identify a specific management style—see
textbook, icons on homepage) used by Governor Rockefeller during the riot. Were his actions
throughout this ordeal appropriate?
Governor Rockefeller’s management style was traditional. He sent Commissioner Oswald to
take care of the riot and expected results. He was unwilling to go to the prison when others
asked because Oswald was there to take care of it. He supported Oswald to the press, but
expected the riot to be taken care of.
Governor Rockefeller’s presence at the prison would serve to further agitate the prisoners.
Also with his traditional management style the prisoners request were being addressed more
directly with Oswald that it might be with Rockefeller. Then when the prisoners were not
happy with the responses from Rockefeller they would want someone higher up in the
government. At some point one person has to take care of it, and not keep moving up through

5. the administration. There needs to be someone in administration left to oversee the after
action and any after investigation that may be needed.
His flat out refusal to go to the riot shows inflexibility in how he manages. He could have gone
to the location to monitor, or provide support for Oswald, without taking over. He would have
also been able to provide for additional logistics to the incident, such as guard troops to
augment the state troops. However when Oswald requested Rockefeller it showed he was
unable to handle the situation. He probably needed to respond to the situation or send a
representative.
6. Discuss any questionable unethical conduct you observed in this video.
The video shows the extensive use of shotguns which would be excessive force in most of the
situations presented by the prisoners. Especially since the prisoners who did have weapons had
short range weapons which would not be immediately threatening to the officers with the
shotguns, and any threat to the hostages could not be effectively dealt with, without exposing
the hostage to the same use of force. The video shows officers firing from the catwalks, either
at targets on the catwalk or down into the yard. The prisoners down in the yard would not
pose a threat to the officers on the catwalk, and again if a hostage was present their use of
force by buckshot would also endanger the hostage.
After the riot, the video showed those officers involved in retaking the prison forcing the
prisoners to belly crawl across the yard. Prisoners were pushed, kicked and struck as they were
forced to the ground to crawl. Some that were already on the ground were kicked again. There
was no reason to bring the prisoners out of the prison to crawl across the yard, other than to
punish them for the riot.
7. Identify changes you would make as a new warden assigned to Attica after the riot.
As warden I would seek funds to update the structure and security features of the prison. I
would also seek to either increase the capacity of the prison through expansion of the prison or
reduce the number of prisoners in the prison. As well as separating the yard into smaller areas
for better control of smaller groups of prisoners let out for exercise. I would also work to
remove the accessibility of security controls from being accessible to prisoners, and increased
security measures to reduce the number of prisoners out of the their cells at one time.
I would seek out improved training for my personnel on riot control, mid‐level uses of force,
and rifles and training so that threats to life can be addressed with the proper weapon systems
so that others near someone who poses a threat are not also endangered by the officer’s use of
force.
Summary/Conclusion:

6. From the video representation of the riot and Commissioner Oswald’s actions, it appears he
took over too much of the riot incident too quickly, without meeting with the warden and
working out a plan of what they were going to do. He was overly concerned with the
negotiations with the prisoners, and did not property plan for contingencies to make entry into
the prison to use force to retake the prison.
His negotiations were poor and gave up too much to fast without receiving any concessions
from the prisoners themselves. The give was all one‐sided. The prisoners however were
setting up defensive works, making weapons, as some were still meeting with Oswald and the
reporters. Oswald should have taken this as his way of planning for the riot. Use the personnel
that were there to plan for a contingency. The warden whose decisions prior to Oswald arrival
appeared to be a traditional leader could be used to plan the assault on the yard, or smaller
assaults inside the prison to retake the halls and blocks prior to trying to retake the yard. He
could be making the plans and practicing the assault with the teams who were there waiting.
This would have made everyone ready for when the decision to take the prison by force would
not have been so rushed and haphazard. The planning and practice would have been done
then the execution of the assault would have moved better with fewer casualties.
He should have also had an area for doing the negotiations with the prisoners which he had
more control of, and not entering into the yard with all the prisoners around you controlling
what was going on. He could have met with smaller negotiation groups in a more controlled
setting, without exposing so many to being taken hostage themselves. His decision to meet in
the middle of the prisoner makes the prisoner negotiators more bold and demand more than
they would if they were meeting in an area controlled more by Oswald.
His allowance of the media to meet with the prisoners in the yard also makes them bolder in
their claims and serves to agitate them further, when some would have lost interest and been
more likely to return to their cells with less force used. This also exposes the media to being
taken hostage as well, and opening liability to Oswald and the state for allowing them in the
prison.
The release of information was also haphazard in the moments after the riot, so that false
information was given, or no information was being given, and agencies that were there to aid
the prison were being thrown under the bus by those releasing the information. In the one
scene, the information officer speaking to the press was being asked about the actions of the
troopers, to which he told them they would have to speak to the troopers. This incident was
first the prisons, and by Oswald’s involvement the state, which was over both the prison and
the troopers. The information should have come out as a single body acting together, and not
everyone answering for themselves in such a disconnected manner and no one taking
responsibility for anything. Having a coordinated response to the press also helps to keep
wrong and false information from coming out. This helps to keep from having to reversing prior
statements or giving anyone a black eye from having to fix problems with the information
released, as in the reports of the hostages being killed by having their throats slashed, only to
have the information countered by the coroner’s office as false.

7.
The treatment of the hostage’s families was also handled poorly. Leaving them in a common
area with the media and everyone else left over from the retaking the prison, they are probably
hearing bits and pieces of information that is not true or makes them believe the worst. Then a
runner comes out to tell the families what has happened to their family members, then they
are allowed to run to leave on their own to go locate their family without guidance and with
emotions running high. They should have had a separate area for the family of the hostage to
be supported with clergy, aid in dealing with the stresses, and later locating their family.
Lastly, the after treatment of the prisoners by those guarding them was wholly unethical and in
many cases criminal. The treatment also shows the prisoners that the agreements made in the
negotiations with Oswald would not be upheld, and that Oswald cannot trusted to live up to his
word. Given the political upheaval of this time I was surprised to hear that no one was held
criminally liable for the actions during and after the riot.
I believe that Oswald might have been good at reforming prisons, but was unprepared to
handle such an incident. He might have been so dedicated to the ideals of reform that
decisions outside of his reform focus were not considered, and thus he was unprepared when
time came for the use of those ideas during the forced retaking of the prison.