Vol. 3 Issue 1 March 2011

Transcription

March 2011
Published by Barbara Brooks, Sentencing and Justice Reform Advocacy (SJRA)
Vol. 3, Issue 1
P.O. Box 71, Olivehurst, CA 95961 530-329-8566 YesWeCanChange3X@aol.com www.SJRA1.com
For decades, America’s answer to crime has been to put more criminals behind bars for longer. That expensive strategy
is yielding diminishing returns. It’s time for a closer look at ways of helping ex-offenders steer away from crime.
By Joan Petersilia
"Winter 2011 Joan Petersilia, as first published
in The Wilson Quarterly."
The announcement last summer
t h a t t h e number of Americans behind bars
had increased for the 37th consecutive year in
2009 provoked a fresh round of grim
editorializing and national soul-searching.
With its prisons and jails now holding more
than 2.4 million inmates—roughly one in
every 100 adults—the United States has the
highest incarceration rate of any free nation.
As a proportion of its population, the United
States incarcerates five times more people
than Britain, nine times more than Germany,
and 12 times more than Japan. ―No other rich
country is nearly as punitive as the Land of
the Free, ‖ T h e E c o n o m i s t has declared.
But a highly significant fact went largely
unremarked amid the hubbub: The population
of the nation‘s state prisons, which house all
but a relative handful of all convicted felons,
decreased by nearly 3,000. Although the drop
was slight in percentage terms, it was the first
since 1972. (State prisons held 1.4 million
inmates at the end of 2009 and federal prisons
more than 200,000, while the number held in
local jails, mostly for minor crimes, averaged
about 770,000 over the course of the year, and
the majority had yet to face trial.) In
California, which has the nation‘s largest state
prison system, with nearly 170,000 men and
women behind bars, the prison population fell
Joan Petersilia is the Adelbert H. Sweet Professor
of Law at Stanford University and codirector of the
Stanford Criminal Justice Center. She is the author
of several books, including When Prisoners Come
Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry (2003), recently reissued in paperback, and Crime and Public
Policy (2011).
for the first time in 38 years. The national
prison population—including those held in
federal facilities—grew by less than one percent, the slowest rate in the last decade. These
changes mean it is very likely that we are
seeing the beginning of the end of America‘s
long commitment to what some critics call
―mass incarceration.‖
If that shift does occur, it will not be
because the United States has solved its crime
problem. In fact, if there were a close
correlation between crime rates and
incarceration, the prisons would have begun
emptying out in the late 1990s, when crime in
most of its forms began to decrease.
H
-you‘re-out laws (which mandated prison terms
for repeat offenders), man datory minimum
sentences (forcing judges to impose fixed
sentences regardless of mitigating factors), and
truth-in-sentencing measures (requiring
inmates to serve a greater proportion of their
imposed sentence before becoming eligible for
parole). These policy changes increased both
the probability of going to prison if convicted
and the length of prison terms.
Many liberal critics, pointing out that twothirds of those imprisoned in federal and state
facilities are African Americans and Hispanics,
contended that ―mass incarceration‖ is little
more than a new form of racial and social
domination—―the new Jim Crow,‖ as Michelle
Alexander, a law professor at Ohio State
ow did we get here? Soaring crime
rates, especially in the inner cities, are
the
m os t
obvious part of the
explanation. From
1960 to 1990, the
overall U.S. crime rate
increased more than
fivefold, the frequency
of violent crime nearly
quadrupled, and the
murder rate doubled.
Drug use increased.
The upsurge was
widely blamed on
lenient punishment,
particularly for violent
r ep ea t
off en d er s .
Legislatures responded
by passing ―get tough‖
measures, including
sentencing guidelines
(which required prison
sentences for some
offenders who in the
past might have been An influx of offenders forced the states to build new prisons, but
put on probation), so- annual costs as high as $50,000 per prisoner are spurring a search
called three-strikes-and for new answers.
Page 2
Barbara Brooks, Sentencing and Justice Reform Advocacy - It’s My Business, and it’s YOUR Business, Too!
their sentences. There is a very simple and
immutable ―iron law of imprisonment‖:
Almost everyone who goes to prison ultiUniversity, put it in the title of her recent book.
mately returns home—about 93 percent of all
But virtually all those who study the matter offenders. (A relative handful die in jail; the
now agree that imprisonment has reached often rest have life sentences or are on death row.)
counterproductive levels, particularly in the Although the average offender now spends 2.5
case of drug possession and other non-violent years behind bars, many terms are shorter, with
crimes. The prominent conservative scholar the result that 44 percent of all those now
James Q.Wilson, whose book Thinking About housed in state prisons are expected to be
Crime (1975) set the national crime control released within the year. This year, some
agenda during the 1980s, recently wrote, ―This 750,000 men and women will go home.
country imprisons too many people on drug Many—if not most— will be no better
charges with little observable effect.‖ In my equipped to make successful, law-abiding
travels around the country I have conducted an lives for themselves than they were before they
unscientific survey of prison administrators, landed in prison.
and nearly all of them say that 10 to 15 percent
Today‘s offenders are different from those
of their inmates could be safely released.
of the past. They are still overwhelmingly male
What we are seeing today is a growing (though the female proportion of the
recognition that our approach to dealing with
population has climbed to nine
percent), African American or
MASS IMPRISONMENT has helped
Hispanic, and unskilled. But
reduce crime rates, but the effects have been the offenders leaving prison
now are more likely to have
considerably smaller than proponents claim. fairly long criminal records,
lengthy histories of alcohol and
drug abuse, significant periods of
convicted criminals is simply too costly. Not unemployment and homelessness, and a
only is the price too high, but the benefits are physical or mental disability. Their records are
too low. The states now spend an estimated more likely to include gang activities and drug
$50 billion on corrections annually, and the dealing. In short, the average offender today
growth of these outlays over the past 20 years leaves prison at a greater disadvantage (and
has outpaced budget increases for nearly all more primed for trouble) than his predecessors
other essential government services, including did. Yet fewer participate in prison
transportation, higher education, and public rehabilitation and work programs than a decade
assistance.
ago. When I was cochair of California‘s Expert
alifornia, where I was involved in the Panel on Rehabilitation in 2007, the panel
corrections system in various capacities found that California spent less than $3,000 per
under reform-minded governor Arnold year, per inmate, on rehabilitation programs,
Schwarzenegger, pours 10 percent of its and that 50 percent of all prisoners released the
massive state budget into correctional facilities. year before had not participated in a single
Between 1985 and 2005, it built 21 new program.
Even as the states were cutting back inprisons—more than one a year. The state‘s
house
prison programs most severely, in the
prison population surged, and so did costs: The
decade
from 1985 to 1995, Congress and state
state spent nearly $10 billion on corrections
last year, or more than $50,000 per prisoner. legislatures were passing dozens of laws
(The national average is $23,000.) Now that closing off many job opportunities to exCalifornia is grappling with a budget crisis, it offenders and restricting their access to welfare
is clear that it cannot continue on this course. benefits and housing subsidies. Former inmates
The evidence for the rest of the country may be are now commonly barred from working in
some of the economy‘s fastest growing fields,
less dramatic, but it is no less clear.
These vast sums are not buying as much as including education, childcare, private security,
many people think. Mass imprisonment has and nursing and home health care. Such legal
helped reduce crime rates, but most specialists barriers sometimes protect us from dangerous
agree that the effects have been considerably felons, but they also make it hard for men and
smaller than proponents claim and that we are women who want to go straight to get their feet
Beyond the Prison Bubble
(Cont‘d from page 1)
C
now well past the point of diminishing returns.
Confinement behind bars accounted for at most
about a quarter of the sub-stantial decline in
crime that occurred during the 1990s (mainly,
most researchers believe, by preventing
imprisoned offenders from committing fresh
crimes against the general public rather than by
promoting a deterrent effect).
More important, that decline may well be
reversed if we don‘t do a better job of planning
for the reentry of prisoners who have finished
March 2011
on the ground.
It should not come as a surprise to learn
that we have a corrections system that does not
correct. The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics
reports that two-thirds of released prisoners are
rearrested for at least one serious new crime,
and more than half are re-incarcerated, within
three years of release. The two-thirds rearrest
rate has remained virtually unchanged since the
first recidivism study was conducted more than
40 years ago. Former prisoners account for an
estimated 15 to 20 percent of all arrests among
adults. That means that thousands of
Americans are being victimized every year by
criminals who have already done time without
experiencing ―correction.‖
At the same time, we are beginning to
recognize that our overreliance on locking
people up has an especially malign effect on
poor urban neighborhoods, where up to 20
percent of the adult male population may be
behind bars at any given time. Not only do the
men come home with diminished prospects
that hurt the whole community, but as
criminologist Todd Clear shows in Imprisoning
Communities (2007), their absence weakens
the family and social networks they need when
they come home and hurts those left behind. It
is no accident that the sons and brothers of men
who go to prison are more likely to follow the
same path. These trends help cause crime
rather than prevent it.
Prison is where some people belong, many
for long periods of time. But we need policies
that do not produce more crime in the long run.
Budget cutters may rejoice at the chance to
gut corrections budgets, and liberal critics of
mass incarceration may celebrate any policy
that brings prison populations down, but it will
prove hugely counterproductive if we act without
giving serious thought to how we will deal with
the offenders who are released. Until recently, for
*Includes drunk driving, vice, weapons, and other offenses
March 2011
―nothing works.‖ In part, this view grows out of
an experience that began in the 1980s, when
horrendous prison crowding in southern prisons,
economic woes, and court rulings spurred some
unusual experiments. When federal courts ordered
the states either to build new facilities or find
some other way to punish offenders, the states
began experimenting with alternative sanctions.
Georgia, for example, developed an intensive
supervision program (ISP) for probationers that
yielded some evidence that it reduced recidivism
rates—and also appeared to save the state the
cost of building two new prisons. By the mid1990s, virtually every state had passed some kind of
legislation for intermediate sanctions.
Probation and parole departments across the
country implemented a variety of ISP programs,
including boot camps, intensive supervision, day
reporting centers, and electronic monitoring. The
hope was that some offenders who normally would
have been bound for prison could be ―diverted‖ from
expensive prison cells to more intensive
community programs that could keep a closer
watch on them and offer more support services.
Other offenders could be released early into
community programs. But as I discovered as
codirector of the RAND Corporation‘s national
evaluation of ISPs in the early 1990s, despite all the
good intentions most of the ISP dollars wound up
being used to fund more drug testing, parole agent
contacts, and electronic monitoring rather than
enhanced social services. The main result was that
offenders who violated court conditions by using
drugs, for example, were
A CHRONIC OFFENDER may cost
identified more quickly and sent
custody.
society more than $7 million in the course of intoWithin
a decade, ISPs went
from being ―the future of
his criminal career.
American corrections,‖ as one
demonstrates that offenders who earn a high school probation officer enthused in The Washington
equivalency diploma while behind bars are more Post in 1985, to what seemed to be a failed social
likely to get jobs after release. Those who receive experiment. Most of the programs were
vocational skills training are more likely to get dismantled by the late 1990s. Some advocates of
jobs and higher wages after release. And those the prison buildup pronounced that alternatives to
who go through intensive drug treatment programs prison had been tried and did not work. But the
in prison are less likely to relapse outside of it. If we RAND study found that when efforts were
could implement effective programs, we could actually implemented according to the original
expect to reduce recidivism by 15 to 20 percent. design, they were rather effective. Offenders who
To put it in concrete terms: About 495,000 of the participated in drug or alcohol treatment,
750,000 prisoners who will be released this year community service, and employment programs
are likely to be rearrested within three years. With had recidivism rates 10 to 20 percent below those
effective programs, we could reduce the number of nonparticipating offenders.
of repeat offenders by nearly 100,000. We could
Today, we have even more refined knowledge
do even better if these efforts were linked to of what works. The most popular approach
improved services in the community upon release. involves using something akin to a medical
Such efforts would pay for themselves by technique, focusing on individual cases. Called
reducing future criminal justice and corrections the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model, it uses
costs. Economist Mark A. Cohen and risk assessment tools to size up each person and
criminologist Alex Piquero found in a recent match him or her to the right program. The
study that a high-risk youth who becomes a treatment efforts are behavioral in nature (with
chronic offender costs society between $4.2 and rewards and punishments) and geared to place the
$7.2 million, principally in police and court sharpest focus on higher-risk offenders. There is a
outlays, property losses, and medical care. You heavy emphasis on cognitive behavioral and
either pay now or pay later—and you pay a lot ―social learning‖ techniques—ranging from anger
more later.
management training to sessions devoted to
Advocates of rehabilitation constantly weaning offenders away from their negative and
struggle against the widespread view that antisocial attitudes. All of these efforts use peers
example, Kansas was a model of forwardthinking prison policy. In 2007 the state
legislature funded a range of programs—
involving education, drug treatment, and
subsidized housing—to help former inmates
reintegrate. The approach appeared to work: The
number of ex-offenders returning to prison
dropped by 16 percent between 2007 and 2009.
But then came the economic crisis and cutbacks.
According to state legislator Pat Colloton,
recidivism rates quickly spiked. Kansas is back
where it was in 2007.
To avoid throwing away much of the
progress we have made in reducing crime, it is
more imperative than ever that we pursue
alternatives to prison and new ways to ease
inmates‘ reentry into civilian life. The good
news is that after decades of false starts,
researchers have finally begun to zero in on the
things that can make a difference in at least
some cases. The news was good enough to help
persuade the conservative Bush administration
to push through the $330 million Second
Chance Act in 2007, giving government
agencies and nonprofits the tools to get some of
these efforts off the ground. The money was to
be doled out over time. The bad news is that
amid today‘s intensified financial strains,
Congress may be reluctant to continue funding
this effort to enhance prisoner reentry programs.
Rehabilitation programs reduce recidivism if
they incorporate proven principles and are
targeted to specific offenders. Research
Page 3
and family members to reinforce their messages.
As several studies show, they work. Criminologist
Edward J. Latessa of the University of Cincinnati
studied the results of RNR programs in Ohio‘s 38
halfway house programs and found that they cut
the recidivism of high-risk offenders by as much as
20 percent. Several states, including Maine,
Illinois, and Oregon, are now using the RNR
model.
Community partnerships are another approach
that hold great promise. An excellent example is
the Boston Reentry Initiative (BRI), a city
interagency program that brings together law
enforcement, social service agencies, and religious
institutions to start working with inmates while
they are still incarcerated. On the day the prison
doors swing open, a family member or mentor is on
hand to meet each released prisoner, and social
service agencies are prepared to begin working to
help the former inmate get a fresh start. The BRI
focuses only on the highest-risk offenders leaving
prison. They are offered opportunities for work and
treatment, but for those who fail to take advantage
of them and slip back into crime, the program calls
for swift arrest and fast-track prosecution. In a
sense, the BRI is the ISP experiment all over
again—but this time backed with treatment
resources, mentorship, and community
collaboration. The results have been impressive.
Harvard researchers found that BRI participants
had a rearrest rate 30 percent lower than that of a
matched comparison group.
I
t is no longer justifiable to say that nothing
works. There is scientific evidence that prison
and parole programs can reduce recidivism. It
is not easy and it is not inexpensive, but it is
possible. To retreat now would be to pull the rug
out from under hundreds of programs that are
contributing to the decades-long war against
crime, which, whatever its shortcomings, has
been one of the nation‘s great success stories,
vastly improving the lives of ordinary citizens and
the vitality of cities. One of the surest ways we
know to keep crime down is to prevent those who
have committed crimes in the past from doing so
again.
That is not to say that criminality is a problem
that can always be solved. People go to prison for a
reason, and in many cases there is very little or
nothing that anyone can do to change the choices
they will make in the future. Rehabilitation
programs are not for every prisoner, and we
should not waste money on those who lack
motivation. But it would be foolish not to help
those who wish to change. Effective rehabilitation
and reentry programs that help offenders go home
to stay are good for them, and good for the rest of
us, too. 
Reprinted by permission of the author.
Page 4
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE—CDCR
March10, 2011
Contact: Lt. Charlie Hahn
(530)251-5100
x5501
FRIDAY, MARCH 11, 2011
INMATE DIES AFTER BEING
ASSAULTED AT HIGH
DESERT STATE PRISON
The case is under investigation by The Office
of the Inspector General Bureau of Independent
Review and the HDSP Investigative Services
Unit. Additionally, the Lassen County District
Attorney‘s Office and the Office of Internal Affairs have been notified.
High Desert State Prison, located in Lassen
County, opened in 1995 and houses approxi-
Susanville – High Desert State Prison (HDSP)
investigators are investigating the death of an
inmate as a homicide.
The inmate was found unresponsive in his
cell on March 10. He was pronounced dead at
9:29 a.m.
The deceased inmate was serving his first
term and was committed from Riverside County
on May 4, 2010. He was received at HDSP on
August 2, 2010, and was serving a 90-year-to-life
sentence for aggravated sexual assault of a child
under 14. The inmate‘s name is being withheld
pending notification of the next of kin.
The deceased inmate‘s cellmate has been
identified as the primary suspect in the death, and
has been placed into the Administrative Segregation Unit pending investigation into the incident.
The suspect, 35, is a second term inmate received
from Los Angeles County on September 9, 1993.
He was received at HDSP on December 23,
2008, and is serving a 64-year-to-life sentence for
rape with force and violence and assault with a
deadly weapon. The inmate‘s name is being withheld at this time pending investigation.
mately 4,500 minimum-, medium-, and maximum
-custody inmates. The institution employs more
than 1,500 people and provides academic, trade
and vocational training to incarcerated inmates.
POSTED BY CDCR_STAR AT
4:56 PM
-ADVERTISEMENT-
-ADVERTISEMENT-
March 2011
March 2011
Page 5
As incarceration rates explode in the US, thousands are placed in solitary confinement, often without cause.
James Ridgeway and Jean Casella Last Modified: 19 Mar 2011 09:51
The spectre of Bradley Manning lying
naked and alone in a tiny cell at the Quantico
Marine Base, less than 50 miles from Washington, DC, conjures up images of an American Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib, where isolation and deprivation have been raised to the
level of torture.
In fact, the accused Wikileaker, now in his
tenth month of solitary confinement, is far
from alone in his plight. Every day in the US,
tens of thousands of prisoners languish in "the
hole".
A few of them are prison murderers or
rapists who present a threat to others. Far more
have committed minor disciplinary infractions
within prison or otherwise run afoul of corrections staff. Many of them suffer from mental
illness, and are isolated for want of needed
treatment; others are children, segregated for
their own "protection"; a growing number are
elderly and have spent half their lives or more
in utter solitude.
No one knows for sure what their true
numbers are. Many states, as well as the federal government, flatly declare that solitary
confinement does not exist in their prison systems. As for their euphemistically named
"Secure Housing Units" or "Special Management Units", most states do not report occupancy data, nor do wardens report on the inmates sent to "administrative segregation."
Prosecutor, judge and jury
By common estimate, more than 20,000
inmates are held in supermax prisons, which
by definition isolate their prisoners. Perhaps
50,000 to 80,000 more are in solitary confinement on any given day in other prisons and
local jails, many of them within sight of communities where Americans go about their everyday lives.
Over the past 30 years, their numbers have
increased even faster than the US' explosive
incarceration rate; between 1995 and 2000, the
growth rate for prisoners housed in isolation
was 40 per cent, as compared to 28 per cent
for the prison population in general, according
to Human Rights Watch.
Likewise, no one can state with any consistency what these prisoners have done to
warrant being placed in solitary confinement
or what their isolation is supposed to accomplish.
As it stands, prisoners can be thrown into
the hole for rule violations that range from
attacking a guard or a fellow inmate to having
banned reading materials or too many postage
stamps.
In doling out months or even years in soli-
tary, the warden and prison staff usually serve
as prosecutor, judge and jury, and unsurprisingly they often abuse that power. The cases
are shocking and they abound.
Isolating the mentally ill
At the all-solitary Colorado State Penitentiary, Troy Anderson has spent the last 10
years in isolation, never seeing the sun or the
surrounding mountains, due to acting out on
the symptoms of untreated mental illness.
Anderson has been diagnosed with ADHD,
bipolar disorder, intermittent explosive disorder, anti-social personality disorder, cognitive
disorders, a seizure disorder and polysubstance
dependence, and he has attempted suicide
many times, starting at the age of 10.
His mental health treatment in prison has
consisted largely of intermittent and inappropriate medications and scant therapy, most of
it conducted through a slot in his solid steel
cell door. By Colorado's own estimate, 37 per
cent of the prisoners in its isolation units are
mentally ill.
Steve Bright of the Southern Center for
Human Rights described the case of a 15-yearold boy named JP - accused, but not yet tried
or convicted, of murder - who stands to spend
up to two years in isolation in a Tennessee
county jail because his family is too poor to
afford his bond, set at $500,000. Although he
had previously attempted suicide and been
treated for mental illness, JP has spent his time
behind bars "with no physical contact from a
member of his family and no schooling".
His mother is allowed to "visit" him by
seeing him twice a week for 30 minutes on a
TV monitor. She has not touched her son in
over a year. "The child has gone for over a
year with no physical contact other than a
correctional officer holding his arms when
they move him."
This story is far from rare: Children in
adult prisons and jails often end up in solitary
because there is simply nowhere else to put
them to prevent them being victimised.
Prisoner Michelle Ortiz was first admonished, then shackled and sent to solitary confinement as punishment for reporting her molestation and subsequent rape by a male guard
at the Ohio Reformatory for Women. As the
Columbus Dispatch reported: "When Ortiz
reported the first assault to prison official
Paula Jordan, the official told the inmate that
the male guard was being transferred from the
facility and was 'just a dirty old man'. That
same evening, the male guard assaulted her
again."
She was sent to solitary, reportedly, so that
she could not tell other prisoners what had
happened to her. Victims of prison rape, like
children, are often isolated "for their own protection", or given a choice between solitary
confinement and continued sexual assault.
Punishing jailhouse journalists
Timothy Muise, a prisoner at the Massachusetts Correctional Institute at Norfolk,
protested to prison authorities about a sex-forinformation racket being run by guards, in
which certain prisoners were permitted to have
sex in return for snitching on others.
He was thrown into solitary for two-and-ahalf months, brought up on disciplinary
charges for "engaging in or inciting a group
demonstration", and shipped out to another
prison. It is far from unusual for prison whistleblowers to be silenced through the use of
solitary confinement.
Maine prisoner Deane Brown, serving a
lengthy sentence for burglary and robbery in
the lockdown unit of Maine State Prison, began sending reports by letter then by phone to
a community radio station; he called his reports "Live from the Hole".
He was reprimanded by the warden who
said he was "disclosing confidential information through the media". Then Brown was
suddenly whisked away to a series of maximum security prisons in Maryland, and ended
up in a particularly brutal solitary confinement
unit in New Jersey. Cases of jailhouse journalists being punished with isolation have surfaced in other states, as well.
At the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola, Herman Wallace and Albert Woodfox
were placed in solitary confinement following
the murder of a prison guard. They maintain
that they were targeted for the crime because
of their membership in a prison chapter of the
Black Panthers.
More than 38 years later they are still in
solitary. Both men are now in their 60s, but the
warden maintains they must be kept in isolation because they are "still trying to practice
Black Pantherism" and he does not want to
"have the blacks chasing after them".
'Bone-cold loneliness'
What conditions await these prisoners
consigned to solitary for months, years or
decades? A typical supermax cell runs about 2
x 3 metres and contains a toilet and sink, a slab
of poured concrete for a bed and another slab
for a desk.
Occupants may get a brief shower a couple
of times a week and a chance to exercise in
what looks like the run of a dog kennel three
days a week. Food is shoved through a slot in
Page 6
Cont‘d from Page 5
the door. They get perhaps one phone call a
month and an occasional visit, through a barrier, with an approved list of family and
friends. They can select a book every so
(Cont‘d Page 6)often from an approved list.
On occasion, a TV inside or outside the cell
blares programming at them, often of a religious nature.
If they are deemed to have misbehaved in
some way they may be deprived of exercise,
books or visits; if deemed a suicide risk, they
can have their blankets and even their clothing
removed. In one Louisiana parish prison last
year, suicidal inmates were found being
locked, alone and often naked, in so-called
"squirrel cages" measuring 1 x 1 metre; onefourth of the locally mandated size for caged
dogs.
Wilbert Rideau, a renowned prison journalist (and now a free man), describes in his
recent memoir In the Place of Justice the
"bone-cold loneliness" of life in solitary confinement on Angola's death row.
He describes solidarity as being:
"Removed from family or anything resembling
a friend, and just being there, with no purpose
or meaning to my life, cramped in a cage
smaller than an American bathroom. The lonesomeness was only increased by the constant
cacophony of men in adjacent cells hurling
shouted insults, curses, and arguments - not to
mention the occasional urine or faeces concoction. Deprivation of both physical exercise and
meaningful social interaction were so severe ...
March issue-Apr. 2, 2011
Thank you all for all your kind thoughts and
prayers for our family. We appreciate it so much.
I pray also for you, that you live in peace and
harmony between each other, even though you
are in difficult situations. Accept the challenge
of turning your lives around in a positive direction.
To answer some of your questions, so I can save
the postage and time…
1. No, the US Supreme court has not made a
ruling on the population yet, no matter what you
heard. We should hear something by June. Start
asking for verification of the story you are being
told, so you can save your stamp.
2. I have been told there is no wording on a 3Strikes initiative at this point. It will probably be
done by the Campaign, (who or whatever that is)
and probably will be determined by the results of
the poll. At this point, it is my understanding that
FACTS has nothing to do with the poll or the
wording, and whether or not they will be consulted is not known at this time. SJRA has no
roll in the initiative, other than educating, organizing and helping to raise dollars that can help
in the grassroots level of advertising, printing,
mailing, etc. This fundraising is at the request of
that some men went mad while others feigned
lunacy in order to get transferred to the hospital for the criminally insane."
On occasion, prisoners facing the possibility of a lifetime in solitary have asked judges
to sentence them to death instead.
Europe vs. the US
In Europe, solitary confinement has largely
been abandoned, and it is widely viewed as a
form of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, in violation of international human
rights conventions.
Recently, four British nationals who face
terrorism charges successfully delayed their
extradition to the US by arguing in the European Court of Human Rights that they would
face life in a federal supermax prison.
But American courts and politicians have,
for the most part, failed to take a strong
stand against solitary confinement. There are
signs, however, that the consensus may be
shifting in the US.
I n Colorado, which holds more than 1,500
prisoners in long-term isolation, a bill was
recently introduced in the state legislature to
curb the use of solitary.
The legislation would significantly limit
the isolation of prisoners with mental illness or
developmental disabilities, and would demand
that prisoners be reintegrated into the general
prison population before their release. In addition, it emphasises what the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU) - which is strongly
supporting the bill - called "the staggering cost
of using solitary confinement, rather than mental or behavioural health alternatives, as the
default placement without regard to medical
prisoners at R.J. Donovan, and donations are
primarily from prisoners and their families.
3. Orange County District Attorney is still filing
3-strike charges for ‗any felony.‘ According to a
staff attorney at the O.C. Public Defender‘s Office, they (P.D.) does not have any program for
bringing back strickers to court for re-sentencing.
It sounds like they would not get any support for
that from D.A. Tony Rauckakas.
4. The 3-Strikes case Ricky Wilson v Knowles
07-17318) mentioned in the article ―‘3 strikes‘
sentence overturned for lack of jury‖ on the front
page of the February issue is very limited on who
it might help. If you want the Wilson opinion,
please send 3 stamps for printing and postage. I
forgot to add the case cited, and for your information, it is Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.
466.
5.We will have more information to give you
about the Wilson case in the April issue. If you
want a copy of the Wilson opinion, please send
three loose stamps to cover printing and postage.
As you probably have noticed, the February issue
was late, and now this March issue is late also.
May I remind you that although you will receive
it in April, it is still the March issue. With all the
donation calculations and more and more prisoners ordering the newsletter, PLUS, helping Keith
March 2011
needs, institutional security or prisoner and
public safety".
A similar bill introduced in the Maine state
legislature last year ended with legislators
agreeing to "study" the issue further, and legislation on solitary confinement is being floated
in New Mexico as well. At the same time,
cases have been brought before federal courts
in both Louisiana and Colorado, challenging
on constitutional grounds the decades-long
solitary confinement of several of the nation's
most isolated prisoners.
At the same time, the ACLU's David Fathi
believes that a combination of legislation and
litigation, grassroots activism and investigative
journalism are producing "a breakthrough in
public awareness".
If this is true, it may at least bring this
form of "no-touch torture" out of the shadows
of the prison walls and into the light of the
public square.
James Ridgeway is a senior Washington correspondent with Mother Jones Magazine. He is the
author of 16 books and has also worked for the
New York Times Magazine, The Economist,
Harper's, The Nation and the Village Voice.
Jean Casella is a freelance writer and co-editor
of Solitary Watch.
James Ridgeway and Jean Casella are editors of
the website Solitary Watch
(www.solitarywatch.com).
This article originally appeared on Al Jazeera
English on March 19, 2011 (http://
english.aljazeera.net/indepth/
features/2011/03/201137125936219469.html).
Reprinted by permission of the authors.
load info on the new website, it has become more
difficult. Now, in April, there is the problem of
filing tax return. So, lots of extras going on to
take me away, but nevertheless it will be done
each month, so don‘t worry about that…
I was thinking about this, and thought I would
ask you prisoners who are able to do it, to send
stamps for more issues at a time. For instance,
instead of sending 3 stamps every month, send 6
for 2 issues, 9 for 3 issues, etc. That way, I will
not have to deal with adding the new info each
month, which will save on processing of mail,
data input, and filing, etc. AND it will also help
you to save on the amount of postage you have to
use each month. Many of you already are doing
this. I know everyone cannot, but if you are one
who can, I would appreciate it! It would be a
great help.
REMEMBER TO IMMEDIATELY SEND A
CHANGE OF ADDRESS (EVEN IF YOU
MOVE 2 DOORS DOWN). Often times your
mail is not forwarded to your new cell #. I think
it is because the mailroom checks for contraband,
and if all is ok they simply send it to the location
on the envelope. They do not check every address in the computer to see if it has
changed. So, probably someone
else will get your newsletter, if
you don‘t let me know. God Bless . . .
March 2011
By Boston Woodard
The California Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation (CDCR) is again making a
mad dash over the borders with large numbers
of prisoners in an expensive attempt to reduce
overcrowding within its 33 state prisons.
Out-of-state transfers are the topic of many
conversations on prison yards now. Prisoners
throughout the state are being ―reclassified‖ at
special committees for evaluation to see if they
meet the ―criteria‖ to leave the state. Some
prisoners want to transfer, but many do not
want to be housed hundreds or thousands of
miles from their friends and families.
Transferring prisoners out of state to
―private prisons‖ began in 2006 (not part of an
existing interstate compact agreement California has had with several other states for years)
as ―one way‖ to help reduce the grossly overpopulated prison system. It is a well-known fact
that California‘s bulging prison capacity is due
to the amalgamation of tough sentencing laws,
political right-wing extremists‘ fearmongering
with the help of dirty prison officials and a
guard‘s union with a fat coffer it intends to
keep that way.
The out-of-state transferring fiasco by the
CDCR does not mean California‘s prison population is being lowered. What it means is California‘s prisoners are being spread out across
the country. California taxpayers are still paying through the nose to house these thousands
of prisoners whether they are in a California
pen or a private prison in some other state. The
millions of California tax dollars spent on
maintaining out-of-state prisoners are not only
leaving the state but the money is also flowing
into the economies of multiple states throughout the country. This offers no help to California‘s deficit crisis.
It likely costs more to house prisoners out
of state, as they are required by law to be flown
or bused back to California to parole, back to
the same neighborhoods (counties) where they
were sentenced.
The transfers to private prisons in multiple
states is part of a so-called remedy to reduce
overcrowding, which was found to be the
―principle‖ cause of deplorable medical care
within California‘s prison system, and the
―preventable‖ deaths of approximately one
prisoner per week.
On November 30, 2010, oral arguments in
U.S. Supreme Court Case #09-1233, Schwarzenegger v. Plata, were heard regarding the
CDCR‘s inability to provide constitutional
levels of medical care to state prisoners.
When questioned by U.S. Supreme Court
Justice Sonia Sotomayor about when the CDCR
will begin delivering adequate constitutional
(medical) care to state prisoners, Carter G. Phillips, attorney for the state/CDCR blurted,
―There is no specific time frame. I mean, obviously we believe that we are entitled to a reasonable opportunity to comply with the receiv-
ers (court appointee overseeing the CDCR‘s
medical crisis) orders and to bring ourselves
ultimately into compliance with the Constitution.‖
The court reminded Phillips that the CDCR
repeatedly defied, stalled or ignored more than
70 lower court orders over the past several
years. Phillips pretty much hedged his response
with a typical CDCR rhetorical response.
Donald Spector, attorney for the
―Appellees‖ (prisoners/Plata), spoke to the
court about California‘s prison population declining, slightly, by about 10,000 prisoners.
―Most of that decline has been due to transfers
to out-of-state (private) prisons,‖ said Spector.
Another rumor that has been circulating in
many prisons is that tens of thousands of California prisoners will be released ―early‖ as a
result of a modification to the ―85%‖ sentencing law (an emanation from the Three Strikes
law) to ―50%‖ or ―half time.‖ Not going to
happen, at least not now. If such a sentence
modification did occur, it would in all likelihood be for nonviolent offenders and it would
not be retroactive.
According to Spector‘s testimony at the
Supreme Court, ―It‘s a population crowding
reduction order. The court is not ordering the
state to throw open the gates of its door (sic)
and release people. They can reduce crowding
through more transfers to out-of-state.‖ The
Supreme Court will decide what to do with the
Schwarzenegger v. Plata case sometime this
spring.
Many prisoners in the California Correctional Center (CCC) in Susanville believe this
new push to transfer as many prisoners as possible to other states is prompted by the latest
Supreme Court look at the Schwarzenegger v.
Plata case. In a November 2010 meeting at
Susanville, it was recorded in the minutes of
that meeting that ―Out of State Transfers: The
CDCR in Sacramento controls out-of-state
transfers. A list of inmates eligible for transfer
is sent to each of the institutions. No flexibility
any more when it comes to transfers. Camp
eligible inmates will not be transferred; Level
II/III CCC inmates not eligible for camp (fire
camps) are being transferred. CDCR‘s goal is to
transfer 10,000 inmates out-of-state by year
end, and next year (2011) to expand the number
to 15,000. With a new governor and administration, we‘ll need to wait and see what happens
next.‖
The Susanville meeting minutes went on to
read, ―The out-of-state facilities provide webcam visits to help inmates maintain ties with
loved ones far away.‖ Oh right, that‘ll make
everything much better! California prisoners
are forced to transfer out of state, separated
from their families who had been physically
visiting them to maintain the best connection
possible under the circumstances. Now, the
family members of prisoners will get to see
them on a computer screen from thousands of
Page 7
miles away. Way to go CDCR authorities;
that‘s really going to help maintain family ties!
Sadistic bent
comes
to
mind.
The CDCR is scurrying to make it appear it
is headed toward some semblance of compliance with the court orders. Prisoners who were
(a year or so ago) ineligible to meet the out-ofstate transfer criteria are now candidates for the
move. The CDCR is becoming desperate because of the latest pressure on them. No telling
what other scanty methods they will come up
with next.
When transfers began in 2006, the first
prisoners targeted were ―foreign nationals.‖
Many of these prisoners were ill-prepared to
fight the transfers because of a language issue,
not understanding their rights or whether the
arbitrary transfers specifically targeting them
were legal. Appeals were filed and lawyers
from various sources—private firms, law
schools and other pro bono counsel—stepped
up to assist the targeted prisoners.
Less than a year later, in mid- to late 2007,
the out-of-state transfer eligibility criteria were
changed to include non-foreign nationals. Some
groups of prisoners such as lifers, those with
medical issues or pending surgeries and prisoners with active (pending) court litigation were
placed on exemption status and remain in California.
There are mixed feelings among prisoners
selected, processed and then forced to transfer.
Some want to go for the ―change.‖ Others want
to go to get out of California‘s piss-poorly run,
sub-constitutionally run and corrupt prison
system. Many deal with these realities to remain close to home and family.
One prisoner, Chris, said he was classified
by the committee overseeing the transfers at the
CCC as ―qualified‖ for transfer. According to
Chris, he has six months remaining on his sentence. He figures, based on what happened to
others who were transferred with little time left,
that he will ―transpack‖ (pack his property for
transferring) in three or four weeks and be
taken by bus to a southern California prison.
From there, Chris will be bused (again) or
flown to a private prison in Arizona where
prisoners are sorted out at a ―reception center‖
and then transferred to other states.
By the time Chris arrives at his designated
(for-profit industrial complex) private prison,
he will pretty much have to re-transpack his
property, only to be shipped back to California
due to the mandatory return policy. This action
experienced by Chris will repeat itself possibly
thousands of times with others throughout California‘s massive prison system. How long will
it continue? How many tens of million dollars
will be wasted?
This transferring and hiding prisoners in
other states is an ongoing smoke-and-mirrors
shell game by the CDCR to make it appear that
it is complying with the courts. These out-ofstate transfers are an expensive ruse in an effort
to dupe Californians and the courts into believing that these transfers will make the unnecessary deaths and medical neglect by an incompetent and ineffectual prison (Cont‘d Page 11)
Page 8
By Jane Dorotik
Pee-Wee is everybody's favorite friend.
She's always willing to help someone with
a project or a special task. She gives, and
gives, and gives, to those who surround her.
Her petite frame is filled with a big heart.
She worked for many years in the bike
shop, repairing discarded broken-down
bicycles to donate to needy children at
Christmas time. Perhaps for Pee-Wee repairing bikes is sort of a metaphor for repairing broken lives behind bars. It is one
of the projects CIW has been involved in
for several years and Pee-Wee takes great
pride in taking a broken down bicycle and
making it shiny new again.
Pee-Wee has been incarcerated now for
22 years. She was sent to prison with a 15-tolife sentence back in 1989. Her Minimum
Eligible Parole Date (called your MEPD in
prison vernacular) was in 1999, fully 12
years ago. The MEPD is the date the court
assumed she would be released if she followed a good program and rehabilitated
herself. So she goes to the Parole Board
each year, hoping that this time she has
done enough to convince them that she is
now "safe" to be released back to society.
Only now, of course, thanks to Marcy's
Law, she can only go back every three
years, and then only if she is granted the
minimal denial period. Pee-Wee has done
everything she was supposed to do, she's
programmed successfully in prison, she's
completed several vocational programs so
that she will be employable, she has participated in all the available self-help groups.
Well, Pee-Wee went to the board last
September for her parole suitability hearing.
Like every prisoner she was filled with all
the hope and trepidation every lifer shares.
Hope that maybe this time she will express
herself in just the right way, say the right
words, and demonstrate the correct remorse
and insight so that the board will find her
suitable for release. Trepidation because so
often for prisoners it seems no matter what
you say, or how you say it, the board is not
going to grant you a suitability finding.
You see, for so many of these women
who have been to the board over and over
again, those really are the only variables....
What they have to say, and how they say it,
how they demonstrate insight and remorse.
Because all of the other factors.... being free
of recent disciplinary actions, having a positive psychological evaluation, having confirmed and viable parole plans, those have
all been met long ago and many times over.
Pee-Wee was not found suitable at this
September hearing. Her unsuitability finding was based on boiler-plate language, the
"callous nature of the crime", a perceived
"lack of insight," etc., etc. She was given a 3
year denial and so she would not be allowed
to present herself in front of the board for 3
years (the minimum denial period now prescribed as a result of Marcy's Law). However, the BPH commissioners did offer her
the opportunity to petition for an expedited
hearing, indicating they felt she was very
close to being found suitable for release.
A request for an expedited hearing is
process where a prisoner may request to be
reviewed for suitability by the BPH in a
shorter time frame than what the denial
called for. Very few prisoners are offered
this from the BPH, although it is a right,
identified under the law, since Marcy's Law
came into effect. Marcy's Law extends the
standard denial periods from I to 5 years, to
the new denial periods of 3 to 15 years.
So, of course, Pee-Wee was pleased that this
had been offered to her. But Pee-Wee was
also aware of the miserable statistics on
actually granting a prisoner a request for an
expedited hearing. Of more than 120 requests for an expedited hearing, only 2 prisoners had been actually granted the right to
be reviewed by the board in a shorter period
(and then only after a prolonged fight). There
is a great deal of speculation that the rule
was never really intended to be utilized, and
was only inserted to prevent prisoners from
filing a claim of an "Ex Post Facto" application against Marcy's Law. The statistics would
certainly serve to fuel this speculation. A class
action suit has been filed on behalf of all lifer
prisoners who are past their MEPD, challenging Marcy's Law as an Ex-Post Facto application.
Well, Pee-Wee's exultation at being so
close to parole suitability was short-lived.
In January Pee-Wee was called back to the
BPH for a repeat hearing. Apparently the transcript of her hearing had so many "inaudibles"
in it that the BPH decided just to repeat the
hearing. This alone was suspicious because we
have known of prisoners who have had 300+
"inaudibles" in their hearing, and motioned for
a new hearing on this basis, but a new hearing
was not granted. Pee-Wee's September hearing
certainly didn't contain 300 "inaudibles." So
Pee-Wee was called back to the BPH in January, only now she was now given a 7 year
denial. Nothing had changed from Pee-Wee's
perspective, no disciplinary actions against
her, no new psych evaluation, nothing. But
this team of BPH commissioners found her
unsuitable for 7 years. Three years to seven
years just because it was a different pair of
BPH Commissioners.
The rate of recidivism for older lifers, of
March 2011
which Pee-Wee is but one of over 20,000 currently behind bars in California, is practically
negligible. Lifer's who are past their MEPD (in
other words they have already served their full
term) account for about 23 thousand of the
167,000 prisoners in California. Most of these
are here for a single crime committed many
years ago. CDCR's own report (CDCR Adult
Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report of Oct
2010) demonstrates clearly that the safest prisoners to release are older prisoners and those
who have been incarcerated for a long time.
The average cost of incarceration for a
woman over the age of 55 is a staggering
$138,000 per prisoner, per year. So you do the
math.... 20,000 prisoners X $138,000 per year
= approx 2.8 billion we could be saving. Can
you imagine what we could spend that money
on? Subsidized day care for mothers, after
school programs for at risk kids, medical clinics, college funding, aid to underprivileged,
and so much more.
So when solutions are offered to resolve
the state's fiscal crisis, here is a great place to
focus on. Release older prisoners and lifers. 
Jane Dorotik, California Institution for
Women
By James Swon
When I first started in the California prison
system, I was stressed out!
B Number, looking for a place to hide from
myself and ESCAPE my reality with any makebelieve fantasy that would help create a sense of
self-esteem, if not for a day, for just a moment . .
ROCK-BOTTOM was my mental and spiritual
home, without question, 32-years ago. Trying
this, Trying that! Anything to escape the reality
of self!
Clean Time? Who cared about Clean Time?
When your lifestyle was suicidal
and you couldn‘t even look yourself in the face,
because you didn‘t like what you saw. . .
115! Who really cared? Surely, I
didn‘t! Yeah, I‘ve been there too . . .and here I
am, 32 years later, with 25 years Good Time!
WOW! I never thought I‘d live to see such an
accomplishment, but here I am . . .
I started thinking . . .MAYBE the
Parole Board might give me a release date! After
all, I DID change my life, and I‘m not the same
as I was 32 years ago. Maybe they will notice
that, or maybe I can get an override to a Level 1,
or go to an Honor Camp . . . Or even a Level 2 . .
.
Naw, No Go . . .
Nelson Mandela said once that his greatest
victories were his silent victories. Victories nobody else knew about, but him. Therefore, nobody felt good about them but him. . .
Then, I wondered if my skin color were different, would my 25-years Clean Time be viewed
different, and therefore be rewarded? Maybe,
maybe not! I‘ll never know . . .(See Page 10)
March 2011
On March 7, 2011, Families to Amend California‘s Three Strikes
March 7, 2011. We as
Members and Friends of
Families to Amend California‘s Three Strikes, do declare on this 17th anniversary of the signing of AB
971, The Three Strikes
Law, that we will increase
our efforts to educate and
organize throughout the
state of California and that
within two years, this cruel Photo submitted by FACTS
law will be amended!!
This California law was born of terrible every violator to the same life sentence, The
human tragedy, but it was sold with fear- Three Strikes Law looks a lot more like blind
packed lies and many of our citizens voted for revenge, than justice.
Well, the citizens of California are no
those lies. Unaware of what lurked within the
With 70% of the voters
law, the public was told that Three Strikes longer unaware.
would take violent criminals off the streets. telling us that they back our position, we will
Yet in distinct contrast, there are 5,000 non- move forward to amend this law so that men
violent men and women, ―3 Strikers‖ locked and women with nonviolent third offenses will
up for 25 years-to-life under California‘s noto- not be subject to the outrageous sentences
rious Three Strikes law at a cost of $50,000 a dictated by this deceitful law, and billions of
year per prisoner. By condemning each and dollars a year can then be used to improve
schools, parks and
public transportation. 70% of the
voters are saying
the cuts they want
to see are to prisons
It is
certainly no secret
that the California
educational system is in shambles.
Increased
class size and
Page 9
— made the following declaration:
teacher layoffs are making it harder and harder
to properly educate our children, and hefty
tuition hikes at all state universities and colleges have put the dream of higher education
out of reach for many.
The poor, the disfranchised and the homeless have reached historic numbers and at a
period in history when more help is needed,
the rug is being pulled out from under lifesaving programs. Hospitals and schools in
California are cutting services, programs and
teachers. Libraries and parks are cutting hours.
The elderly and disabled live in fear of what
the next round of cuts will take from them.
Why are prisons the only sector that never sees
the knife?
And, why is it so difficult for us to see one
obvious solution to the budget crisis?
The reason is fear. We are being sold a bill
of goods which says our streets will not be
safe unless our prisons are full. But we know
better now. 17 years of three strikes has not
made our streets safer. Instead, 17 years of
three strikes has robbed families of their loved
ones while robbing taxpayers of billions of
dollars a year.
"Before March 7th, I had never been to a Rally before.
This was my first.
I can't explain the excitement I felt and how it got me so hyped on the fight
against the 3 Strike Law . I met families that were much like myself, fighting for their loved one. My mom, dad, sister and daughter joined me at the
Rally to take a stand against this horrible law. My brother Steven
Ketchens, is serving a 2 Life plus 45 year sentence for a domestic violence
case in which he was set up by his "scorned wife"...others like Titus
Warmsley who's been given 30 to life for an accessory to a purse snatching. Another case who's serving 26 to life for taking his cousins DMV
test....and another case serving 25 to life for stealing a pair of socks, and
the list goes on. How rediculous is that? I became overwhelmed from hearing their stories. This law is DAUNTING AND DEMORALIZING! This
law has to go! I'll continued to fight against it until it is OUSTED!"
Debra Ketchens
Debra Ketchens, a FACTS member, and also an SJRA Family Volunteer,
with her family, Mom, Dad and Daughter….Thanks to Debra for volunteering
to take some pics of the FACTS Rally on 3/7/11.
Page 10
By David Onek
Reprinted from Calitics
California voters overwhelmingly passed
the Three Strikes initiative in 1994 based on
the promise that it would take repeat violent
offenders off the streets.
But now, more than fifteen years after the
initiative‘s passage, we have the benefit of
facts to help us understand the true impact of
Three Strikes.
Most Californians already know that in the
wake of Three Strikes the cost of corrections
has soared. Our state prison budget is now so
high that California spends as much on prisons
as we do on higher education.
But many Californians are surprised to
learn that, under Three Strikes, Curtis
Wilkerson of Los Angeles was sentenced to
life for petty theft of a pair of socks; that
Shane Taylor of Tulare was sentenced to life
for simple possession of 0.1 gram of methamphetamine; or that Greg Taylor of Los Angeles was sentenced to life for attempting to
break into a soup kitchen to get something to
(Cont‘d from Page 8)
well, at least I did accomplish 25 years Clean
Time, rewarded or not. I accomplished all
these years clean . . .for myself and those
around me who do care. Staff and prisoner . .
.I know who you are and I respect that . . .But
naw, don‘t fool yourself! Just because you
accomplish 25 years Clean Time, don‘t mean
they will let you go
They should let prisoners go who are no
longer a threat to public safety. But the cages
still await me, as I arrive into my reality each
morning . . .
25 YEARS CLEAN TIME should be a message to prison authorities, that a
human being has changed their life around,
from a bad person, to a good
person . . .25 years Clean Time should be
viewed as Honorable . . .and shown
respect to . . .25 years Clean Time should
be established as an ‗incentive‘ . . . a
‗motivation,‘ for young and old alike . . .
it should be encouraged, and rewarded,
it should be promoted! Not looked down
on . . .
Quiet Victory! Sure, but now, with this
poem written, it can be a goal for YOU to
accomplish also, and YOUR victory, too!
James Swon B-97646
C5-117
High Desert State Prison
P.O. Box 3030
Susanville, C 96130-3030
March 22, 2011
eat.
In fact, the majority of those put away for
life under Three Strikes – over 4,000 people
total – committed a minor, non-violent third
strike. These non-violent third strikers will,
according to the California state auditor, cost
the state at least $4.8 billion over the next 25
years – almost $200 million per year.
The people named above have an advantage
that the vast majority of three strikers do not -they are all clients of the Three Strikes Project
at Stanford Law School‘s Mills Legal Clinic.
Under the direction of Project co-founder
Michael Romano, Stanford law students have
helped get a dozen non-violent third strikers
released from prison after having their sentences reduced.
They are not being released because they
are innocent. As Romano said on the Criminal
Justice Conversations Podcast,
“Our clients are, in almost every circumstance, absolutely guilty. We’re not going
into court and saying that they didn’t do
it. What we’re saying is that the punishment that they received for this petty
crime is disproportionate.”
This disproportionate punishment is unjust,
and it is bankrupting our state. We are wasting
precious resources to unnecessarily incarcerate minor offenders who pose little threat to
society for huge periods of time – and drain-
March 2011
ing resources away from the law enforcement
agencies, community organizations and
schools that can truly prevent crime and keep
us safe.
Simply put, it is time to reform Three
Strikes – so that it is focused on the serious
and violent repeat offenders we all agree society must be protected from. Because Three
Strikes was passed by a voter initiative, it can
only be changed by initiative. In the past,
Three Strikes was viewed as untouchable. But
now, with the state facing fiscal catastrophe,
and Romano and his students bringing attention to the unjust extremes of the law with
each new client that gets released, there is
momentum for change.
Romano thinks that there is another ingredient necessary for successful reform: political
leadership. He says that ―with a few notable
exceptions, there has been very little leadership on this issue from our elected law enforcement leaders.‖
Now is the time to show the leadership
what it will take to return to sensible, costeffective and fair criminal justice polices in
California.
David Onek is a Senior Fellow at the Berkeley
Center for Criminal Justice, former Commissioner on the San Francisco Police Commission and candidate for San Francisco District
Attorney. You can listen to Onek’s recent interview with Romano and learn more about
Onek’s campaign for District Attorney at
www.DavidOnek.com.
CALIFORNIA LIFER NEWSLETTER
CLN: A comprehensive newsletter mailed every 6-8
weeks. State and federal cases, parole board news,
statistics, legislation and articles on prison, parole
and correctional issues of interest to inmates and
their families.
CLN also provides services such as copying and
forwarding federal and state cases, articles and news
and materials available on the Internet.
SUBSCRIPTIONS: Prisoners: $25 (or 80 stamps)
per year (6 issues minimum). Free persons: $90.
CLN, Box 687, Walnut, CA 91788
March 2011
PVSP‘s Ad-Seg has no medical care
whatsoever. No shower shoes for staph
infected showers. No toothbrushes, except for one every 2 weeks. Inmates not
receiving any legal material until 30
days after committee. Even within 30
day deadlines. It‘s really bad and I
always get the same old answer: ―IT‘S
NOT MY F_ _ _ _ _ _ JOB!‖
KVSP—It‘s in the Water!—I was at
KVSP from early 2006 to early 2008.
Two months after I was there my skin
became blotched, and is now all over my
face, hands, arms (those are the worse
areas), and other parts of my body.
When I brought it to their attention in
2008, they gave me sunscreen and told
me not to worry. Forget what they told
me. It‘s a blatant cover-up, as I never
had the problem before arriving at
KVSP.
SQSP—Four guys at SQ ended up with
chicken pox, and were taken to hospital
and now all are released. They have had
Page 11
us on ‗quarantine‘ for quite a while
now, no visitors, except of course for
overnight family visiting. What‘s up
with that? I have already had chicken
pox, as have most of the guys here. In
the first 2 days they brought our meals to
our cells. Then they made us go to the
chow hall, because they said they
‗couldn‘t afford the paper plates.‘ The
food should have been delivered in trays,
anyway. Work is fine with them, and so
has been showering together. Now, they
have extended the quarantine, until April
13th, or maybe the 17th, even though
they are bringing in tours of SQ. This is
so bogus! They don‘t know what they‘re
doing.
Just got word we are off quarantine
and on ‗modified program‘ and still
can‘t have visitors. We are told we all
have to have blood tests now. Teachers
are coming in, family visits are happening, and guys are coming in from Tracy
and Corcoran, who were not even tested
before they came in. They are transferring into North Block, then being moved
to H Block, and now H Block has been
put under quarantine. Who the hell is
making these decisions! Is everyone
doing their own thing around here?
All names withheld by SJRA Editor
-ADVERTISEMENTCont‘d from Page 7
health care system go away. Interesting.
Many lifers are receiving CDCR/BPH FAD psychological evaluations indicating a moderate or high risk that
they do not deserve, based upon the misuse of actuarial
measures. This will result in a BPH lengthy denial and
many more years of suffering.
A private psychological evaluation, arranged with the
help of your attorney, will correct this injustice and in
many cases result in your deserved release. If you have
such a denial, a new psych report is new evidence,
allowing you to go back to the board sooner.
I have over 40 years of experience (over 3000 reports)
evaluating lifers and my reports are recognized by the
courts.
MELVIN MACOMBER, Ph.D.
PMB 316
8789 Auburn Folsom Road, Suite C
Granite Bay, CA 95746
(916) 652-7014
reports@drmelmac.com
The federal courts should consider backing up buses to the front doors
of the CDCR headquarters in Sacramento and ferry off some of those
folks. Maybe then the California prison system will begin to recover
from decades of administrative failure.
*****
Since CDCr has taken away Boston‘s typewriter, he is hand-writing his
articles. The staff at Community Alliance newspaper in Fresno, CA
transcribes, copy edits, and posts the articles to Indybay. (Posted on
February 6, 2011)
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/02/06/18671419.php
Boston Woodard is a prisoner/journalist serving his sentence in California Correctional Center in Susanville. Boston has written for the
San Quentin News and the Soledad Star and edited The Communicator.
AB175, by Tim Donnelly-R-Hesperia, would have deleted the sunset
on CDCr‘s out-of-state transfer program and eliminate a prisoner‘s
right to revoke their transfer after five years.
The first hearing in Public Safety was March 15, 2011, but it failed
passage. In reading the analysis, it had no support, but had plenty of
opposition: CCPOA, Calif Public Defenders Assn. and Legal
Services for Prisoners with Children
Page 12
In his letter to Bruce
Swenson, Senator Burton gives us a hint that
we need to contact our
elected representatives
and make them aware
of the need for sentencing reform with the
Three Strikes policy.
We don‘t have much
faith that politicians
will have the political
will,* but with our
input and that of our
families, we hope they
will get the idea that
the public wants
change. Maybe then,
as Jerry Nutt was trying
to get across to him, is
that with a 2/3 house
vote, they could pass
something to amend the
3-strikes law.
*aka-courage, cojones,
balls, guts
March 2011
March 2011
Fellow Inmates,
I would like to thank all of you who have
donated to this Initiative Fund. Thank you for
your contributions!
I had hoped that every non-violent, nonserious Third Striker would have participated, but
still I am happy about the results so far, even
though we are still short of our goal.
I do understand that some of you are just
getting the news of this fundraising effort. I am
also aware that some of you have given multiple
times. Some of you who gave are not even
effected by the Three Strikes Law.
I humbly ask that the readers of this article
become Ambassadors for this project, and make an
effort to find those on the yard, and even the contacts you have on the streets, who will help us.
Pass the word, make copies, send letters,
form groups. Be a true voice for this cause.
We need to get the other strikers and their
families involved. Our reward will be freedom.
Failing to do anything can mean death in prison.
No Governor, no Three-Judge Panel, no
legislators and no U.S. Supreme Court are going to
change this law or release any Three-Strikers.
The only way is through the Initiative
process. Do not be fooled to think otherwise.
We are extending our deadline to September
1, 2011 so that we can raise all we can. We realize
we are not going to be the ones to do the major
funding of all the millions of dollars it will take to
get an initiative on the ballot. Our goal is to help
as much as we can, and to show that we care
about ourselves. THIS IS PERSONAL! THIS
IS ABOUT US!
Please identify and reach out to your fellow
inmates of all races who are effected by this initiative. Reach out to your families and communities.
Our goal is that every non-violent, nonserious third striker give twenty dollars by September 1, 2011. If you can give more, please do
so. If we all commit ourselves to this, we can still
reach our goal of $80,000. It‘s reachable! It‘s
doable!
Those who cannot give money, please give
two books of stamps, or better yet, give the
equivalent of $10 in stamps. Twenty-three
(44cent) stamps would be a total of $10.12. Make
it your goal to do this twice by September 1, 2011,
and you will have attained your goal of $20 by
September 1.
Stamps will be very valuable for mass mailings, postage to send petitions out, etc.
We can also help Barbara by getting email
addresses from our contacts on the street. Contacting by email will not cost postage.
I have FAITH in this project, FAITH in you
and your families. WE CAN DO THIS!
So, please get out there and push this project.
Pass the word. Do not hide this newsletter or
article. It is a great tool for us. Give it to someone
or make copies and ask your families and homies
to help. If you do not have that voice to push this
project, give it to another striker who WILL push
this message.
Oh yeah! This is a challenge, too. ―Pleasant
Valley, I give you Props, you‘re in the lead, but
keep checking your rearview mirror.
Eric Kemp and the R.J. Donovan Strikers
Page 13
Donations to the R.J.D.
Initiative Fund
Challenge
STAMPS/
$ VALUE
MONEY
ASP
ASP
CAL
CAL
CCC
50.00
244
107.36
CCC
CCI
47
20.68
CCI
CCWF
101
44.44
CCWF
65.00
CEN
175
77.00
CEN
50.00
CIW
20
8.80
CIW
CMC
266
117.04
CMC
490.00
CIM
100.00
107
47.08
CMF
25.00
COR
217
95.48
COR
760.00
CRC
CRC
391 172.04
CTF
CVSP
CVSP
DVI
DVI
FSP
829 364.76
FSP
HDSP
116
51.04
HDSP
ISP
106
46.64
ISP
31
13.64
KVSP
134
58.96
LAC
60
26.40
MCSP
KVSP
LAC
MCSP
NKSP
PBSP
250.00
145.00
85.00
115.00
159.00
25.00
NKSP
PBSP
195.00
PVSP 1092 480.48
PVSP
565.00
RJD
666 293.04
RJD
393.00
SAC
128
56.32
SAC
SATF
139
61.16
SATF
SCC
28
9.50
SCC
SOL
14
6.16
SOL
436
191.84
SVSP
88
38.72
SVSP
VSPW
40
17.60
VSPW
35.00
452
198.88
WSP
80.00
WSP
31
SQ
10.00
195.00
OUT OF STATE
AZ
AZ
9
3.96
Jail
43
18.92
Stamps 6010/ $2794.58
—————————-THIS IS OUT OF
BALANCE WITH
DONATIONS-SEE
PAGE 14.
10.00
OK
VALUE
FREE
TOTAL
$ 3888.00
161.00
$4049.00
MATCH $1235.52
TOTAL
Barbara Brooks, S.J.R.A.
R.J.D. Initiative Fund Challenge
STAMPS
151 Stamps brought fwd from Sept 2010
Total value $ 66.44
559 Stamps brought fwd from Oct 2010
Total value $ 245.96
492 Stamps brought fwd from Nov 2010
Total value $ 215.20
OUT OF STATE
OK
Make notation on check
―Initiative Fund‖
Mail to:
Sentencing and Justice
Reform Advocacy
c/o Barbara Brooks
P.O. Box 71
Olivehurst, CA 95961
DO NOT MAKE PAYABLE TO
13.64
SQ
Sentencing and Justice
Reform Advocacy
CIM
CMF
CTF
MUST BE
PAYABLE TO:
$5198.52
2808 Stamps brought fwd from Dec 2010
This is total amt to be matched in $ by
RTF (Returning Home Foundation)
805 Stamps br‘t fwd from Jan 2011
521 Stamps br‘t fwd from Feb 2011
544 Stamps br‘t fwd from Mar 2011
5880 TOTAL STAMPS THRU Mar 2011
MONEY DONATIONS
$ 34-16th Anniv. Project-(Feb-Mar)
$ 205– Sept Donations-RJD Challenge
$ 910-October Donations-RJD Challenge
$ 625-November Donations-RJD Challeng
$ 1013-December Donations-RJD Challeng
$ 1235.52 Total Matched Funds for Dec.
$ 443-January Donations
$ 617-February Donations
$ 136-March Donations
$ 5218.52 TOTAL CASH ON HAND
Page 14
MARCH 1 thru MARCH
March 2011
MARCH 1 thru MARCH
20-Charles Silas (rec‘d 2/16 should have been in Feb issue) SQ
20-Daniel Dent (02/12 should have been in Feb issue) FSP
20-Frank Cornejo (02/03 should have been in Feb issue) LAC
6-Mario Carrello
24-Joseph M. Anderson
20-Mari Gray VSPW 03/11
57-Glen White and Johnny Salazar CSATF—03/11
20-Walter Treen PV-03/14
20-David Gomez WSP-03/07
9-Charles C. James 9 (missed in January) CMF
10-Charles C. James on behalf of Dr. Richard Johnson CMF
20-Mike Lane CTF 3/9
3-Zellicka Savage CCWF 03/16
40-Chuck Longley SQ 03/19
20-Julious R. Whiten CSP-SAC 03/17
10-Charles C. James for the children of 3-strikers CMF
20-Terry D. Ramsey WSP 03/16
20-Perry Washington WSP 03/19
20-Cuong Nguyen FSP 03/23
20-James Lee Johnson FSP 03/18
40-Jeffrey Green RJD 03/23/11
20-Julious Whiten CSP-SAC 03/25/11
20-Stephen Henry SVSP 03/26/11
20-Michael Chavez PVSP 04/01/11
20-Jeff Green RJD 03/25/11
20-Kevin Guyton FSP 03/25/11
6-Anonymous KVSP 03/30/11
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
20-Damon Matheus SQ 3/02
10-Michael Calvin Holmes CMC 3/4
3-George Luis Vargas PV 3/5
20-Alan Hodge PB 3/16
10-Joseph M. Anderson PV 03/18
20-Sally Hayati for Mike Lane CTF 3/28
3-George Luis Vargas PV 03/24
50-Mark Barrera PV 03/30
$
136-TOTAL MONEY DONATIONS, MARCH
$5203.96 Balance Bro‘t fwd from February
$ 136.00 March 2011 donations
$5339.96 GRAND TOTAL THRU MAR 2011
(This does not agree with page 13 calculations, we just
have to live with it for awhile, because there is no time
for looking for needles in a haystack.)
545-TOTAL STAMPS, MARCH
******************************************************
545 TOTAL STAMPS, MARCH 2011
521 TOTAL STAMPS, FEBRUARY 2011
805 TOTAL STAMPS, JANUARY 2011
2808 TOTAL STAMPS FOR DECEMBER 2010
492 TOTAL NOVEMBER 2010
665 TOTAL OCTOBER 2010
151 TOTAL SEPTEMBER 2010 AND FEBRUARY 2010
5987 GRAND TOTAL STAMPS THRU MAR 2011
(Page 13 calculates 6010 stamps, a 23 stamps difference.
So this is out of balance somewhere.)
Message for Eric Kemp: ―I heard your cry from
miles away, and I pledge to make sure your cry
travels many more miles. Non-violent, Non-serious
3-strikers, STAND UP!‖
Straight Forward
Julious R. Whiten
“Prisoners have to help themselves if they
want to get out from under this bad law called
“Three Strikes and You Are Out,” because the
Courts and Politicians are part of the reason
why we are all still locked up.”
Freddie L. Morris, Jr., CTF Central
If you are keeping track of the donations, save this page.
March 2011
Why vote? Because in America, that is
the way we change things. That is the way
we reform the system. That is the way we
guard against the threats to our liberties
and exercise our responsibilities. That is
the way that we keep America free.
Candidates come and candidates go. Elections are won and lost. Sometimes we
elect crooks and nobodies and, every once
in while, a statesman who strides across
the Congress or, from the Oval Office,
across the world like a colossus, showing
the world what it means to be a free people and, more importantly, why freedom
matters.
And, for the same reason, it matters that
you vote. It is your voice – and the only
person who can silence your voice is you.
So applaud, complain, march, protest,
petition – these are your rights but, without your vote, they are meaningless actions, backed up by nothing.‖
Excerpt taken from “Why Vote” by Peter
Roff, published on November 2, 2010 on
FOXNews.com
Peter Roff is contributing editor, U.S.
New & World Report, senior fellow Institute for Liberty and Let Freedom. He is a
former senior political writer for United
Press International.
Check out our new website!
We are adding new info every day.
All the SJRA Advocates newsletters
are there . . . all FREE!
Lots of Resources—Find your
Favorites
Mailing Lists, including Legislators
Email addresses for mass mailing.
Coming Events! Let us know yours!
Criminal Justice Reports
Three-Strikes Reports and Stats
IT WILL ONLY GET BETTER
CHECK IT OUT!
Page 15
“I know many 3rd strike men who are in
prison for the most ridiculous and
harmless offenses. Keep praying that this
unjust law will be cancelled.”
Melvin Macomber, Ph.D.
MELVIN MACOMBER, Ph.D.
PMB 316
8789 Auburn Folsom Road, Suite C
Granite Bay, CA 95746
(916) 652-7014
reports@drmelmac.com
Even though the 17 year anniversary for three strikes is set to come and go, no
one should be lighting candles. For nearly two decades, California has dabbled
in the barbaric with 3 strikes. The result has been thousands of men and women
who have lost their lives to prison, families devastated by the loss of a loved one,
and greater financial burdens to our already strained public monies. We all
know that 3 strikes is cruel but not unusual. It is business as usual in counties
across California which increasingly rely on criminal enhancements including 3
strikes to relegate offenders to a life in prison. The fight to end 3 strikes and to
restore fairness into the process will be a hard one. Many entrenched interests
including an ill informed public will stand in the way. We have to be realistic as
much as we have to be bold. We know the truth. We have to present it with confidence and assuredness. And we have to make allies between family members,
prisoners and any person or interest who is tired of the misallocation of public
money for prisons instead of the real health of our communities. This will be
our challenge over the next few years. Let us rise to the moment at hand.
Charles Carbone, Esq.
PRISONER RIGHTS ATTORNEY
POB 2809
San Francisco CA 94126
tel: 415-981-9773
fax: 415-981-9774
www.prisonerattorney.com
Charles@charlescarbone.com
“Parole board can't require admission of guilt”
“A murder convict who appears to be rehabilitated after decades behind bars can't be denied
parole merely because he continues to declare his innocence, a state appeals court has
ruled.
California law prohibits the parole board from requiring an inmate to admit guilt to be found
suitable for release, the Second District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles said Wednesday.
The three-judge court unanimously ordered the Board of Parole Hearings to reconsider
Kevin Jackson's case and decide whether there are any other reasons to keep him in prison
for the 1981 murder of his ex-girlfriend.”
From the articleBob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
04/01/11
Page 16
We are a positive voice for prisoners through a monthly newsletter
focused on CA prisoner/prison issues.
Our goal is to publish truthful information to educate, motivate and
inspire prisoners, families, general public,
lawyers, legislators and local lawmakers.
We give a voice to the prisoner.
We oppose the Three-Strikes Law, Mandatory Minimums, Marsy‘s Law,
Life Without Parole, Death Penalty, Solitary Confinement.
We believe Lifers should be paroled if found suitable.
We believe that juveniles should not be sentenced to Life Without Parole.
We support drug and alcohol treatment in lieu of jail, rehabilitative
sentences, restorative justice, second chances,
sensible sentences that fit the offense.
We support non-profit prison reform groups and help to get their
message out by offering free space in the newsletter.
We encourage family volunteers to show up when needed, and provide
helps to write letters to politicians, judges, newspapers,
We believe there is power in our votes, and all families, including felons
who are not in prison and not on parole need to ‗show up‘ at the polls
and exercise their right to vote..
WE DO SO MUCH MORE
We are a publication, offering information on CA prison issues. We have
one person on staff, Barbara Brooks, who is not paid, not an attorney
and does not give legal advise.
SJRA cannot:
1. Provide you with legal representation,
2. Give you legal advice or answer any legal questions regarding
specific aspects of your case or your loved one’s case,
3. Assist you with your appeal or post-conviction petitions,
4. Help you file claims against the Department of Corrections or Bureau
of Prisons, or
5. Recommend other attorneys to you for any of these purposes.
If you need legal help, contact a lawyer or the State Bar Association in
your local area.
If you write asking for any of these things, we will not respond to your letter.
SJRA ADVOCATE
(Circle which applies)
SUBSCRIPTION or ADDRESS CHANGE
Please send me a 12-month subscription to SJRA Advocate.
Enclosed is a check or money order in the amount of $15 or $18 if FREE
person.
PRISON______________________________________________________
Name______________________________________CDC#_____________
Housing_________________________
Mailing Address _______________________________________________
City_________________________________ST_______ZIP____________
Make Check/Money Order Payable to: Barbara Brooks, SJRA
Mail to: Barbara Brooks, SJRA . PO Box 71 . Olivehurst, CA 95961
March 2011

Vol. 3 Issue 1 March 2011

Transcription

Similar documents

Official Game Poster

Corin Morgan-Armstrong, Head of Family Interventions, HMP Parc

Auschwitz - Education Scotland

learn - NOLA to Angola

(PDF 1.4 MB) - Gedenkstätte Deutscher Widerstand

April/May - Midnight Express Books

PDF - UC Books To Prisoners

Making Choices 18.6 - Precious Blood Ministry of Reconciliation

Prisoner Support Directory - Partnership for Safety and Justice

stateville speaks - Illinois Prison Talk