Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Long Creek Escapes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislators press corrections officials after three juveniles flee Long Creek in August; department outlines fixes and follow-ups
Summary
Associate commissioner and deputy commissioner told the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee the August incident at Long Creek was opportunistic and that immediate measures — reinforced windows, metal plates, anti-climb fencing, paused outdoor recreation — have been applied; DOC agreed to deliver a redacted assessment and data on segregation/restraint on follow-up.
The Joint Standing Committee on Criminal Justice and Public Safety pressed Department of Corrections officials on how three juveniles left the Long Creek Youth Development Center in August 2025 and on what the agency has done to prevent future escapes.
Associate Commissioner Christine Thibault and Deputy Commissioner Tony Cantillo told the committee the August event was “opportunistic” and distinct from two earlier intentional escapes. Cantillo said immediate, short-term actions included reinforcing windows and installing metal plates and bars; the department also added anti-climb fencing and strengthened procedures for security rounds and illumination around the facility. “What we were able to accomplish was to apprehend the juvenile within a few miles of the facility in about 2 hours,” Cantillo said of a July 18 incident; for the August gym-door incident, officials said all three juveniles were apprehended in Saco within about 10 to 11 hours.
The officials described a layered approach they call the balance of static security (fencing, cameras, locks) and dynamic security (staffing, relationships, programming). Thibault said Long Creek’s census has risen — the facility’s current population was reported to the committee as 45 — and that the department has increased staffing and reduced vacancies in recent years. She said the department will seek architectural assessments to identify structural gaps that could be fixed without making Long Creek a “hardened fortress.”
Members repeatedly pressed for more detail about the conditions preceding the premeditated escapes, including whether any youths had been held in segregation for prolonged periods or subjected to restraints. Cantillo said he did not have those specifics available at the hearing but agreed to provide objective data on segregation, restraints and similar conditions in a February report or at the committee’s request. Thibault also offered to supply a redacted executive summary of outside assessments that lists vulnerabilities identified and non-sensitive recommendations implemented.
Committee members asked why Long Creek had multiple escape incidents while Mountain View — a facility with some similar construction features — appeared to have fewer recent breaches. DOC officials said Mountain View’s evolution into an adult facility led it to modify some static features that are not appropriate for juvenile settings; DOC officials emphasized that prevention focuses on both physical fixes and staffing and programming changes.
Next steps: DOC agreed to bring a fuller report in February, and staff said they will return a short, non-sensitive summary of external assessment findings and a dataset addressing members’ questions about segregation and use-of-restraint history. The committee did not take formal action at the hearing.
The committee’s request for follow-up reflects members’ emphasis on preserving youth safety while protecting juvenile confidentiality; DOC repeatedly cited statutory limits on disclosing juvenile-identifying or security-plan details without a court order.
