Received by Email:
Nevada
Jurisprudence and Prison Report
“Veritas in
Caritatis”
Vol. 4, No
3, Summer Issue 2014
THEME:
“Audi alterum partem” - Listen to the other side!
“Voice of
the Nevada Jurisprudence and Prison Report”
E-mail: nvjprudence@gmail.com
Website: Nvjprudence.wordpress.com (this issue here)
Statement
of Purpose:
The NJPR
Newsletter reports on current prison conditions, good and bad; more importantly
it looks at and evaluates the legal processes and the substantive laws which
are designed to keep men in prison: Pre-trial issues, probation and parole
policy, sentencing structures, post-conviction law, and most important, the
philosophy underlying policy in practice.
The purpose
of the NJPR Website is to provide a repository of affidavits, declarations and
grievances in Web-Dossiers organized by categories of intuitional behavior.
Fundamentally, this is a whistleblowing organization trying to associate with
other "transparency" projects at an intrastate, national and global
level. We seek to identify patterns which can be utilized by the U.S. Department
of Justice.
We invite
any resident, and especially judicial officers of the Courts and government
Administration to write letters to the NJPR.
Index to
this Issue:
Section
One: Conditions
1. Cameras:
For Us, or Against Us? By Rahsquo
2. Crowding,
Violence and Nevada Stickney Report
3. Uppity
Inmate: Engineering Submission, by Cal
4.
Government Pushback, Small Town Style
Section Two: Law, Equity and Policy
1. The Darkness Deepens
2. Sicherungverwahrung and the Male Peril
Section
Three: Art, Culture, Education and Religion
1. Report: Nevada Appellate and
Post-Conviction Project Now Defunct
2. Justice Brandeis Innocence Project
3. New College Program: New Free Dom College
4. Sociological Study Underway
5. Obamacare Now Covers Ex-Felons
6. Poem: The Man in Me by John Fenton
Subscriptions
and Services
Nevada
Jurisprudence and Prison Newsletter can be delivered via e-mail or snail-mail.
We ask you send a copy into NDOC system and your local legislature and press!
E-mail: $3
for 6 months
$5 for 12 months
Snail-mail:
$8 for 6 months
$15 for 12 months
Dept. of
Justice Issue Dossiers:
Scanning,
storage and Electronic Delivery of Dept. of Justice, press, politicians and
state administrators.
.75¢ 1st 10 pages ($7.50)
.60¢ per page after that
Customized letter: $1 per 250 word
Section
One: Conditions
1) Cameras: For Us or Against Us? By Rahsquo
In a
putative effort to curb violence and other illegal activity at NNCC (a
medical/retirement facility) cameras were installed in 2011. Prior to this
installation of cameras in all units (except the human barn unit 10), the only
areas where cameras were active was the infirmary and the visiting room.
The British
author George Orwell (ne Eric Blair) in his visionary novel, 1984, described a
futuristic society that furnished cameras almost everywhere. “Big Brother”
would be individually monitoring your whereabouts. Mr. Orwell’s book was
published in the 1930’s, and may have inspired the voyeuristic practices that
are today disguised as legal surveillance.
Immediately,
I can attest to have witnessed grown men stimulated by the camera installation
to exhibit behaviors of hysterical panic about the sudden lack of privacy. They
wondered what the cameras were for? Some speculated that they were there to
deter and ward off any further assaults by a rogue group of correctional
officers under the leadership of a sadistic lieutenant that harassed and physically
abused old and crippled prisoners. The mutual occasional fisticuffs that are
bound to transpire among 1500 men did not seem to warrant the rise in “get
tough” measures imposed by the administration. After all, NNCC, in addition to
being a medical facility, is a low-medium yard. Surely the majority of the
elderly sick and dying prisoners were no threat to the safety and security of
the institution.
Here is an
example of the seemly side of camera usage in prison:
After the
cameras were up-and-running, a newly admitted prisoner was allegedly assaulted
by one of two prisoners in general population. When the “alleged” assault
victim reported the incident, the cameras were “played back” and the prison
investigator swiftly apprehended the two perpetrator caught on camera—or so the
officials thought. In fact, there was no coverage where the actual assault took
place— inside the bathrooms. Only the hallways have video monitors in the
units. Two black men who appeared on the hallway video “around” the time of the
assault. These mistakenly accused were pressured to randomly name two others,
who were then charged with the assault. One of the now falsely accused had an
alibi that arbitrarily disregarded; he had been in the infirmary for a doctor’s
visit and had proof of it. The other black man lived in another wing, and no
video footage was use to prove he left that wing to go to the other at the time
of the assault. Both innocent men did serious hole time, while the actual bully
went home 2 days after the beating!
On the
other hand, video evidence has brought some justice to the yard. On
Thanksgiving Day 2009, an official lynching occurred in the mental health wards
of the prison infirmary, and because of the existence of a video tape of the
“cell extraction” the killer correctional officials were removed from duty (at
this time there is no knowledge of and criminal changes ever brought against
them). Rumors coming out of the correction staff community report the mentally
deranged inmate was gassed, tazed, and deprived of air with a plastic bag. One
of the rogue cops, before the excrement hit the fan, retired.
The video
evidence reportedly resulted in the firing of two officials, the suspension of
two others.
So, are the
cameras for us or against us? It appears to depend on the practice of a virtue
called justice by the controllers of the cameras.
2) Crowding, Violence and the Nevada Stickney
Report
On and off
the NNCC situation has included the usage of dayrooms for use as temporary
housing in order to upgrade the facility’s Unit bathrooms, increasing the
mandated 90 to 1 ratio of staff to inmate to about 140 to 1 in the two housing
barns 10A and 10B. this Unit did not need any retrofit, having been built in
2007, so it was used as overflow. The work is now done and the overflow was
moved out on July 28.
The
mandates of population-staff ratios stem from a lawsuit in the early 1980’s
that lasted until 2002. It is captioned Stickney v. List, CR-R-79_11_ECR. I am
told stories by old timers, that in those days, correctional officers made
minimum wage and supplemented their income by selling drugs, hookers and booze
to inmate. The ratio of officers to inmates was 1 UNIT to 1 GUARD, resulting in
shockingly high levels of rape (yes, man rape) and assault, obviously
exacerbated by drugs and alcohol.
3) Uppity Inmate: Engineery Total Submission
It is
unfortunate duty to report on the retaliation by an NDOC official against a
fellow inmate. It is truly troubling because, as a witness, it was clear to me
the inmate was innocent of any wrongdoing. It was even more disturbing to
witness the capricious, arbitrary, irrational behavior of a high-ranking NDOC
official, who was so drunk on her own infallible power, she lost custody of her
mind.
The NDOC
was in the midst of implementing its standard [unwritten] institutional
procedure of geno-punitive retribution. This term describes the practice of
operant conditioning of groups. It is a practice consistent with the
deprivation theory of corrections that justifies subtle forms of terrorism
against target populations aimed at deterring future bad acts.
An inmate
of the Unit that [illegally] houses 140 inmates was caught making pruno, or
home-made fruit wine. The police found it in the ceiling. He [the winermaker]
was sequestered to the disciplinary housing unit. But the [unwritten] policy of
NDOC is to punish the entire community in which the transgressor lives. The
policy requires acts of aggression by the prison officials against the entire
cohort, and in this case included:
The
arbitrary and capricious taking of property under color of a law or housing
code,
The
disestablishment of practices and customs of the inmate community, in this case
the use of curtains in front of the defecation toilets and in and around the
bank beds for sleeping privacy,
The drastic
and absurd removal of the ceiling tiles in the rooms where the pruno was hidden
;
The
invention of cosmetic rules of prohibition regarding the placement of fans and
television reception antennas, and the storage of clothes, and usage of shelf
space.
The sudden
capricious demand that “this place has to look like a military barracks”.
The
officials made people straighten out the towels hanging at the ends of beds and
take down decorative items, or intensive micromanage
Although
these seem extremely mild irritants the psychological exacerbation of fear was
impressive, due to the mere increase of police presence in the unit. Normally
there is one officer on duty 24 hours a duty, and visits by “suits” (high
ranking officials) are extremely unusual. During the height of the government
hysterical overreaction to the pruno crime, an uppity inmate had the gumption
to ask the ringleader of the high rankers applying the operant retribution what
the provocation was for such an attack. The Ringleader government thug
responded by demanding the inmates Identification card, and ordering his “level
reduction” by moving him out of his “Level One” unit into a level Two unit. The
level reduction may cause the loss of his job, which would directly increase
the amount of time spent in prison because non-workers do not get “good time”
credit. The loss of lower custody status reduced his privileges, but he is too
terrified to file a grievance, because he fears escalated government push-back
by his being moved to a higher custody yard.
The aider
and abettor of the Ringleader carrying out the orders of his superior official
told me personally, when I asked “why all this hubbub?” “The inmate who
confronted the Glorious Ringleader really pissed her off, he should have known
his place”.
The
practice of harem scarem mass punishments (geno-punitive retribution) has a
counterproductive effect of causing inmate-on-inmate violence which is the
exact opposite of the job of a correctional facility. The behaviors of the
officials trigger mimetic behaviors of the inmates. Because of the immature
example of bullying and irrational scapegoating of 139 men to pay for the act
of one alcoholic inmate, (violence begets violence), the inmates experienced a
huge community increase of blaming, finger pointing, character assassination,
backstabbing and faultfinding—against each other. Only a tiny fraction had the
gumption to file a grievance, which will be reported on next issue.
4) Government
Push-Back, Small Town Style: How to Chill a Prisoner
A recent
exposé in the Rolling Stone, (Putin Clamps Down by Janet Reitman 5/8/14) there
is an interesting series of observations. Each phenomena has an American
homologue.
First, this
sentence uses a category of relation between the government and an individual
or group:
“Wary of
government push-back, the protesters played by the rules,…” (53)
Here, the
term push-back refers to the use of the police power of the national government
of Russia. Here is an example of how push-back works at a prison facility in
the backwood polity of Nevada.
A prisoner
at the Northern Nevada Correctional Center, run under an experimental regime
that imposes collective psychological conditioning (mind control) through a
“level system”, suffered head trauma from a piece of falling concrete. He
received treatment and was even taken out in chains to be checked at a local
hospital. Several days later he found out another man had suffered from a near
miss of falling concrete in the same Unit 4 (the lowest level of the operant
conditioning system). He filed an emergency grievance, stating he wanted an
official to take pictures of the dilapidated concrete ceiling and to be
compensated for the pain suffered.
The officer
in charge called the victim of falling concrete up to the main administrative
office. When he got there he was met by a bizarre sight: all of the correctional
staff assigned to the Mayberry control center had collected up into a choral
group of 5-7 persons and when the inmate arrived inside the building, they all
sang out, in UNISON, the same words, in the same voice:
HIIII
ROBERT!
Wha…?
Really
Robert
filed suit later, and it passed screening, because in addition to the bizarre
stage show, these clowns took him to administrative segregation under the color
of law.
Section Two: Law and Equity
1) The Darkness Deepens
The Nevada
Department of Corrections is generally exempt from all rulemaking procedures
which executive branch officials must use. These Rules are found in Chapter
233B of the Revised Statutes (NRS).
There was an exception, until recently.
The prison store fund rules used to require that the Administrative rulemaking
process had to be utilized. It appears that this requirement might have been
revoked. This rules requirement penciled in at NRS 209.221 (7) and (8) is
referred to in the 233B, stating “except as provided in 209.221, NDOC is exempt
from 233B rules”. However, this language is deleted in a recent computer
printout of the statute, making NDOC’s discretionary rulemaking power absolute,
and thus a despotic dominion.
Chapter 176, NRS 176.0125 establishes the
Advisory Commission on the Administration of Justice, at paragraph 4, states
that the commission shall:
“Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the Department of Corrections… with consideration as to whether it is feasible… to establish an oversight or advisory board…(c) policies for the operation of the Department of Corrections;”
There’s
some hope in that.
Now, any
warden with common sense would want to obtain the intelligence of
circumspection by offering to receive “input” from all parties possible. The unwritten
rules of reason require this. There are cases where this is done. In 2008, this
writer was witness to the actions of Chaplain Garcia at Lovelock. He asked for
inmate participation, he was delivered an article of the Prison Legal News
article regarding the case at Pelican Bay Prison in California where the
officials refused to allow hardbound books. (PLN, July, 07, pg 19)
The result
of that case was a court order for the officials to cut the cover off. Garcia
brought that law to the meeting and a policy was established to do this.
Another example of rulemaking input is at AR 802, Community Volunteers.
At 802.04(i) it states “A volunteer is encouraged to submit suggestions for
conducting, enhancing or improving volunteer services”. What needs to happen is
to change the language to say,
“The warden
shall request, on a yearly basis, the volunteers and families of convicts and
the general public to submit suggestions. The input shall be tallied and
formatted, and a copy delivered to the survey participants, and to the Advisory
Commission on the Administration of Justice, and the Legislative Counsel
Bureau, who shall make said survey report available to the general public in
both formats, digital and hardcopy”.
A third
example of current potential input for policy review and rules process is the
Inmate Advisory Committee (IAC). This practice is being used at the medium yard
at NNCC, and in general is used for conveying decrees from the Glorious Leader,
and as a pressure release value that deals with cosmetic issues regarding the
conditions of confinement. It’s basically a place to whine for whiners and
moaners about trivialities like
television reception.
The
Principle of Government Secrecy is necessary in some situations, such as in
times of war, and the executive war machine needs to conceal its hand from the
enemy. The so-called War-on-Crime justifies civil government secrecy. But the
“war-on-crime is a product of the ideological apparatus of the official
anarchists trying to escalate the war-on-crime for economic good. Malinski v. NY 68 S. Ct 781 demands no
ear be given to loose talk about war on crime!
2) Sicherungverwahrung
and the Male Peril—Myth, Spin and Therapeutic Economy
In the
April 2014 CURE Civil Commitment
Newsletter, the article “The Presumption of Dangerousness” did an excellent
job describing the state of affairs. This reports on two dimensions which are
important if we attempt to be scientifically circumspect. The first dimension
is the historical, and the second is the normative, or “ethical”.
The
historical dimensions open upon the Germanic homologue of “civil commitment”,
or a “non-punitive” taking by the government of some normal civil right.
Traditional German law has something called Massregeln,
which seem, like civil commitment, to fall between civil and criminal forms of
law. Massregeln include sanctions
such a taking away a privilege, like the right to drive a car or work in a
particular industry. The non-punitive taking of physical liberty is called Sicherungsverwarung.
Like here,
the taking of a right in the realm of civil law have fewer procedural
safeguards. In the1871 German penal code they did not distinguish between
penalties civil and criminal. Because the civil taking causes suffering, the
taking cannot logically be thought of as a non-penalty.
There was a
movement to bifurcate the Massregeln
from criminal law that could not get legislated. The German lawmakers did not
want to make it easier for the executive branch to impose civil penalties.
However, that increase of power to impose civil removal of physical was gained
by guess who? Adolph Hitler and his fascist regime. Although abused by that
regime, it has not gone away.
However,
today civil commitment must be pronounced at original sentencing (like many American
enhancement laws here). It must also be reviewed and confirmed by due process
hearing upon termination of the criminal sentence. Also the civil penalty of
post-punitive confinement is safeguarded from abuse by the legal principles of
proportionality and equity (fairness). Safeguards are built-in in ways that
don’t happen in America. This information is taken from “Abusing State Power or Controlling Risk?: Sex Offender Commitment”
by Nora Demleitner, 30 Fordham Urb. L. J. [http://law.fordham.edu/fordham-urban-law-journal/ulj.htm]
1621.
The second
dimension is the normative, or the moral aspect of law, in its most traditional
sense. The current ideological apparatus uses a positivistic rhetoric which
colonizes the public discourse to a point of exclusive monopoly, even among the
most strident critics of the American law-and-order regime. This means an
exclusion of the moral-virtue dimension of law. The historical dimension is
tolerated, but the moral is absolutely dismissed as mere opinion. Therefore,
all public discourse is a soliloquy of the actuarial statistical mathematics,
which appears and sounds impressively scientific. But it is not. The usage of
the rhetoric is done purposely by the law-and-order regime to stir up
widespread panic, sway the minds of juries and judges, and colonize the minds
of the offenders the regime seeks to over-control. This thesis is support by
the well-concealed thesis the critical analyses of academics who have exposed
the validity of psychotherapeutics as entirely non-scientific.
For
example, William M. Epstein, a clinical social worker and professor at University
of Nevada -Las Vegas, writes “Psychotherapy
as Religion: The Civil Divine in America,” [http://www.amazon.com/Psychotherapy-As-Religion-Divine-America/dp/0874176786]
in which he demonstrates convincingly that “The meaning of the field [of
psycho-therapy] is derived not from objective evidence of effectiveness but
from the preferences of the culture-- a sociological marvel rather than a
clinical one”.(4)
What this
implies is that the normative/moral dimensions of society has been expropriated
from its traditional religious institutions and monopolized by a secular
institution which conceals its religiosity behind a spurious mythology of a
morally neutral “science”.
This
amounts to an expropriation of meaning by the forces of the dominant economic
naturalism—“science” merely means “knowledge”, and there can be a “science” of
the now shunned realm of reality called the divine, which has been imprisoned
into the non-scientific realm of the subjective opinion. Thus human
institutions that relate to the divine are targeted and labeled as
“non-scientific”, and therefore rejected as a valid source of moral and ethical
discipline, in both the day-to-day practicalities of life and in the sphere of
political governance.
In fact,
the so-called legal principal of the “separation of church and state”, in
operation, serves the merge and conflate the functions of the church (and
religion generally) into itself. This phenomena did not happen overnight, but
the process has a history, and is taken up in the next section of this essay,
which is forthcoming.
The current
Massregeln of the United States tends
to point its violence on the weakest and most morally suspect of society. In
the Supreme Court case, Buck v. Bell,
it upheld the eugenic therapeutics of purifying the whole fabric of society by sterilizing
the morons, mentally retarded, racially impure and sexually deviant, with a
minimum of administrative due process—given notice and a one-sided hearing.
Only the glaring evils of Adolph Hitler wiped out the statutes in the state
legislatures. It is a known fact that Hitler modeled his reforms after the
genocidal cleansing statutes of California.
Civil commitment laws are nothing less than
euphemized forms of eugenics, seeking to “cleanse” society not only now, but in
the future, of all risk of the new genetic peril: the sex offender. The latest
“peril” of (mostly male) is added to the perennial list of targeted classes in
the prosecution of national warfare. The First World War saw the mass
psychological manipulation of the state psychologist to rouse the American
public to war against the “German peril”. In World War II it was the “Yellow
peril”. In the cold war it was the “Red Peril”. During the drug wars it was the
“Black Peril”. Today we see a gender war, creating the target of the “Male Peril”.
[See “The Emerging Criminal War on Sex Offenders” by Corey Raybarn Yung, 45 Harv. C. R. –C.L.L. Rev. 435]. Since the
vast majority of sex offenders are male, it is not illogical to see the current
Massregeln in terms of a military
offensive in the broader Gender War. [See “The Feminist War on Crime” by Aya
Gruber, 92 Iowa L. Rev. 741]
As an
“enemy combatant” labeled as a “sex offender”, men convicted of such an offense
against the “state” all face civil commitment, especially if we evaluate the
phenomena with sophistication. In other words, there are now increasing
restrictions attached to the regular penal sentences that constitute indirect
and constructive forms of civil commitment in operation, yet not called civil
commitment. They are imposed without due process.
Men
released from prison are paroled, because the vast majority, no matter the
degree of the crime, are given life sentences with possibility of parole. So
they are on life time parole, which federally or locally mandated residence
restrictions, and are subjected to lengthy sentences for failing to register
every three months or being found within three or four football fields
locations of any congregations of minors. So, we see the presumption of
dangerousness not only upon release. We find the presumption in the pre-trial
stage during incarceration, at parole hearings and when granted parole—for the
rest of the offenders life.
The other
observation with an American homologue is this:
“A second
and even more crucial change in the law gave the prosecutor’s office unlimited
discretion on whom to prosecute [in violations of public assembly law].”
So, the
implication here is twofold:
-
That
prior to this liberation of state prosecutors from limitations on their
discretion, there were more stringent rules in place;
-
That
the hallmark and measure of how despotic and tyrannical a government is, one
looks at the constraints in place on the state prosecutors.
Therefore,
we can conclude that there is no greater tyranny and no great despot in the
international scene than the USA. Why? Because only in the United States does
the government prosecutor have absolute discretion, unfettered by any rules,
any oversight, or any power greater than themselves; and this power is not
hierarchic and inefficient.
The
absolute power is networked in a polycentric grip through 3,144 county district
attorneys, plus the huge staffs of 50 state attorney general’s office (not
counting territories). Add to that number the massive United States Attorney
General’s office spread out through the federal district court system, with
each deputy exercising with not a single constraint on their discretion—they
have despotic dominion. All that exist is a hollow and meaningless, as well as
non-binding, codes of professional ethics, all of which clearly and expressly
do not give legal rights or cause of action to hold the network of District
Adversaries accountable.
Section Three: Art, Culture, Education and
Religion
1) Report
on the Nevada Appellate and Post-Conviction Project
NJPR
editorial policy is to maintain a letter-of-inquiry campaign to follow-up on
people, organizations and writers who show concern about the American police
state. Recent solicitations to the national office of “Critical Resistance” [at
1904 Franklin Street, Ste. 504, Oakland CA, 94612] produced a national “Pro
Bono Legal Resource” list. The only outfit listed for Nevada is:
Nevada
Appellate & Post Conviction Project
When this
reporter wrote to the address on the Resource list, he was replied to by
Michael Pescetta, Chief of the Capital Habeus Corpus Unit at the Federal Public
Defender office [at 411 E. Bonneville Avenue, Ste. 250, Las Vegas, NV 89101].
Says Mr. Pescetta “The Project no longer exists. The capital habeus unit of the
FPD now does the work that the Project formerly did”.
The guy
goes on to say he might be able to provide referral services if a concise clear
summary of the case was sent to the Federal Public Defender. Here is the
follow-up letter which has been sent to the Federal Public Defender, Michael
Pescetta:
Dear Sir,
Thank you
for your letter of July 15, 2014. You implied in your letter that you might be
able to provide a referral if a clear status summary of the case is provided.
I’m just checking to see if I understood you correctly.
Also, I’m
enclosing a copy of a letter received from the Justice Brandeis Innocence
Project. It identifies a Non-DNA technique of fighting actual innocence cases.
As a contributing editor to an all-prisoner written whistleblower newsletter, Nevada Jurisprudence and Prison Report,
I am seeking referral to investigative journalists who might be interested in
starting a West Coast Iinnocence Project that serves the horrifying
embarrassment of the Nevada criminal justice administration. You can send an
email to nvjprudence@gmail.com .”
2) Justice Brandeis Innocence Project
As
mentioned above, NJPR has discovered (through the Critical Resistance Resource
List) the Innocence Project at Brandeis University. The Project is run by the
Schuster Institute for Investigative Journalism at 415 South Street, MS 043,
Waltham MA 02454. The Project does not use forensic DNA evidence as all other
innocence projects. Also, as all other innocence projects, the Brandeis Project
serves an exclusive region without exceptions.
NJPR is
attempting to compile a list of investigative journalist in order to organize a
Western United States Innocence Project that would utilize the journalistic
method, as it is sorely needed.
Let us
remind ourselves that the Motherland of the U.S., Merry Old England, has a
permanent, government funded innocence commission, which excludes all police
and prosecutors from its review board.
Here are some authors of investigative reports on the criminal
administration:
karmstrong@seattletimes.com
mauricepossley@gmail.com
bmoushey@pointpark.edu
3) New
College Program for Prisoners
New Freedom
College is a non-profit school recently established with non-accredited college
courses available on a sliding-scale starting at $33.00 per unit ($99. Per 3
unit course), a price which INCLUDES the price of the textbook.
NFC has
applied for official accreditation from the nationwide Distance Education and
Training Council. The mandatory probationary period for the school began in
June 2013 and the school officials fully expect to pass master in June 2015,
less than a year from now.
The low
price above applies to those who have agreed to pursue a 2 or 4 year degree
program. There are fear: Business/Entrepreneur Paralegal Studies Drug and
Alcohol Counseling, and English Language.
New Freedom
College
1957 West
Burnside St. #1660
Portland,
OR 97209
4) Sociological
Study Underway
The July
2014 Prison Legal News article titled “BOP Grievance System Contributes to
Compliance or Defiance of Prisoners” will serve as an inspiration for an
upcoming investigative piece on the NDOC grievance system. A contributor to the
NJPN whistleblowing project will poll inmate populations and create a
statistical analysis of the data collected.
The Editors
of NJPN invite contributions from all sources to add to the data set, such as
ideas for polling questions and the name and location of sociological prison
studies or ideas for future research projects. Contact our public e-mail
address:
The data of
this study will be situated in comparison to the study “Procedural Justice and
Prison: Examining Complaints Among Federal Inmates 2000-2007” by the U.S.
Marshalls Service and the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of
Maryland.
5) Obamacare Will Cover Prisoners? Uh, No.
It is
interesting that prison officials are refusing to disseminate to all prisoners
the great hope-creating news that affects the future well-being of prisoners.
Inmates are thus once again deprived of the comforting sentiment of hope.
The
National CURE outfit reports that “Some [un-named] correctional systems are
helping” to get inmates enrolled into Obamacare prior to release. For older
invalid inmates, this means release can be to a community nursing home. CURE
also reports that the Affordable Care Act also covers, if the state applies,
prison and jail inmates who have to go to outside hospitals for intensive care.
It’s a
complex law that will be research and report on later. Family and friends can
call 1-800-318-2596 for information. That the prison population of America is
deprived of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act is an expression of the
general policy of the ”deprivation theory” of corrections. To extend this
hypothesis further, the exclusion of prisoners from basic care is sure evidence
of a government advancement of the religious principle of the “unworthy poor”.
6) Poem:
The Man in Me, by John Fenton
Before it’s
too late
I saw the
man in my house
And he
could hardly breath
I pursued
the man to desperate end
I’d see him
here and there again
Standing
there in my refracted dreams
Too scared
to bleed, to ‘fraid to fight
Steal away
into the night
Where only
a thief should have the right
Leaping
through every hide-and-find
Ever
allusive not quite in my grasp
I finally
met the man where I could see
Behind the
mirror he wept, the man cries for me.
