But the more I thought about it, the more this made no sense. Why would the uncle of the Times Square bomber be in a low-security prison? He should be in a maximum.
Why? Should family, rather than crime or danger, dictate what type of prison a sentence is served in?
In theory what prison you go to depends on perceived public safety risks presented by the inmate. It also depends on how much the inmate needs to be protected from other prisoners.
If the uncle of a high profile terrorist was arrested and put in jail, I'd expect there to be a high perceived risk to the public, and also a good chance that the prisoner would be attacked by other prisoners. For both reasons you'd want a high security jail.
Why? Should family, rather than crime or danger, dictate what type of prison a sentence is served in?