I’m confused, where did you read they could stand? The cage they describe is 2foot by 2foot and prevents lying, sitting or standing. That’s 24inches by 24inches. The dimensions are probably identical as these are rough estimates by prisoners interviewed. This is the important part of the article:
The four men interviewed by Amnesty International, as well as Florida-based organizations, told the organization about the ‘box’, described as a 2x2 foot cage-like structure located outside in the yard of “Alligator Alcatraz” where individuals are sent for punishment. Individuals are put in the ‘box’, their hands are shackled and their feet are attached to restraints on the ground. They are unable to sit down or move positions, and are forced to remain there for hours in the heat with hardly any water or protection from the sun, heat and insects. According to a man seeking safety, “People ended up in the ‘box’ just for asking the guards for anything. I saw a guy who was put in it for an entire day.”
This reads to me as identical to the CIA box but as an exposed cage in the middle of a courtyard in the baking sun.
It’s 2x2. That’s length and width; depth is not mentioned (it is mentioned when referring to the CIA box), and it says they are unable to sit down, not unable to stand. It also says their feet are attached to the ground in the current cage at issue, again implying that the prisoner is being forced to stand for a long period of time.
The article is confusing and poorly written, though; the CIA box is mentioned again, after the quote about the one at this immigration site. This later mention includes a reference to being unable to stand (but also refers to being “barely able to sit,” thus distinguishing this as the CIA box and not the immigration one, in which we’re told sitting is not possible).
Edit: we don’t have any photos of this thing, and at no point is depth mentioned in the Amnesty International source report, but page 38 of the PDF linked below has an illustration of it. Note that the illustration does not depict a box with any dimensions matching 2 feet, so it’s unclear how accurate this illustration actually is, nor does the artist’s name appear in the report beyond copyright notes for the various images.
I’m confused, where did you read they could stand? The cage they describe is 2foot by 2foot and prevents lying, sitting or standing. That’s 24inches by 24inches. The dimensions are probably identical as these are rough estimates by prisoners interviewed. This is the important part of the article:
This reads to me as identical to the CIA box but as an exposed cage in the middle of a courtyard in the baking sun.
It’s 2x2. That’s length and width; depth is not mentioned (it is mentioned when referring to the CIA box), and it says they are unable to sit down, not unable to stand. It also says their feet are attached to the ground in the current cage at issue, again implying that the prisoner is being forced to stand for a long period of time.
The article is confusing and poorly written, though; the CIA box is mentioned again, after the quote about the one at this immigration site. This later mention includes a reference to being unable to stand (but also refers to being “barely able to sit,” thus distinguishing this as the CIA box and not the immigration one, in which we’re told sitting is not possible).
Edit: we don’t have any photos of this thing, and at no point is depth mentioned in the Amnesty International source report, but page 38 of the PDF linked below has an illustration of it. Note that the illustration does not depict a box with any dimensions matching 2 feet, so it’s unclear how accurate this illustration actually is, nor does the artist’s name appear in the report beyond copyright notes for the various images.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/AMR5105112025ENGLISH.pdf
Ahh yes I see where you’re coming from now