Showing posts with label prison legal news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prison legal news. Show all posts

Friday, September 9, 2011

Remembering the Attica Uprising...


A remembrance of the Attica Uprising, which began 40 years ago today. From Prison Legal News via the Freedom Archives' list-serve (sign up at the link below)...

------------



REMEMBERING ATTICA

By Dennis Cunningham, Michael Deutsch, & Elizabeth Fink

Prison Legal News


This year, September 9th will mark the 40th anniversary of the rebellion at Attica State Prison in upstate New York. As one of the prisoner leaders, L.D. Barkley, announced to the world, the rebellion was “but the sound before the fury of those who are oppressed.” The sound of Attica was heard cloud and clear, but the fury at the time was reserved to the assault force: several hundred violently angry white state police and prison guards, who carried out the massacre that ended the rebellion on September 13, 1971, with 43 men dead. The fury of the oppressed themselves has been a work in progress since that time…

L.D. was one of many politically aware prisoners in New York and elsewhere who identified with the struggle for liberation world-wide, with consciousness growing out the civil rights movement, the urban uprisings of the 60’s, and the ideology and practice of Malcolm X and the Black Panther Party. Much of it was given voice in the writings of George Jackson and Eldridge Cleaver, especially “Soledad Brother” and “Soul on Ice”, whose searing indictment of injustice, racism, and cruelty in the prisons in California echoed across the country, and inspired resistance. A Manifesto demanding reform and urging resistance had come out of California’s Folsom Prison in 1970 and made its way around the Country and into Attica, and the prisoners there had delivered one of their own to NYS authorities, which was ignored, several months before the rebellion. George Jackson was assassinated at San Quentin on August 21, 1971; a few days later the prisoners at Attica staged a surprise protest at breakfast, during which nobody ate and nobody talked. The guards were stunned at the unanimity of it, and unnerved.

A number of the prisoners had been involved in previous, smaller rebellions in the Tombs jail in New York City and at the state prison at Auburn,. Various chapters of political groups on the outside had formed inside, including the BPP and the Puerto Rican Young Lords, and the Black Muslims had large, organized contingent at Attica, as in all the prisons in the state at that time. Political literature flowed freely, and the groups were often able to gather in the exercise yards and various work and other locales in the institution. Grievances against the guards, the administration and the system were many, and widely shared, especially on the part of the Black and Latino prisoners, who came mainly from New York City, and almost all the rest from other big city environments like Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester. The entire staff at Attica at the time was white except for one Puerto Rican officer, who worked in a watchtower and had no contact with prisoners; and the surrounding rural area of Western New York State which they came from was mostly what some call “up South”, to denote the level of racial antipathy and outright bigotry endemic in the local population, and thus the prison work force.

At the same time, there was a strong and growing belief among the prisoners that they had clear-cut rights under the Constitution, that guaranteed fair and decent treatment, and freedom from discrimination; that, despite years of peaceful petition and advocacy, their rights were largely ignored by the prison administration; and that many kinds of nastiness and brutality they experienced from the white guards were a matter of policy. Many prisoners had come to feel that something had to be done.

** ** ** ** **

That morning of September 9th, a Thursday, after rumors that two prisoners had been beaten when taken to the hole the night before, a fight broke out between a handful of prisoners and guards in a hallway, when a door by which they would go to the yard after breakfast was locked, and they objected. A large number of other prisoners soon filled the corridor, and managed to break open a gate to the central connecting point between the cellblocks, “Times Square”, leaving large sections of the prison open, and hundreds of prisoners loose inside the institution. Staff members began to retreat to the administration building, but many were taken hostage by groups of prisoners and finally brought together in one of the four big, open exercise yards, D-Yard, inside the square of huge, three story cell blocks that formed the main prison, where hundreds of prisoners were now congregated. There it was quickly established that the hostages, guards and civilians, would be cared for decently, and protected at all costs, and the large, disciplined Nation of Islam contingent took responsibility for guarding them, in a protected circle in the middle of the yard, while the prisoners gathered in the far corner.

The prisoners quickly began to organize themselves into groups, to form a representative council and begin to talk things over, and decide things. There were roughly 1280 prisoners in the Yard. Several injured staff members were carried on litters to a distant gate, beyond a ‘no-man’s-land’ zone where there had been rioting, so the authorities could get them to the hospital. Thirty-nine guards and civilian employees remained in the hostage circle. The prisoners began to assemble a list of specific demands, and to listen to speeches from each other about the grievances they all shared. They soon had make-shift society set up, to provide protection, food, water and shelter for the hostages, distribute rations and water, and keep order among the large disparate crowd of men.

The prisoner leadership formulated and announced a first list of 28 demands. Leading points included replacement of two notoriously vicious and incompetent prison doctors, and better medical care generally, an end to prison censorship, and slave wages, and for fairness in the parole process. The leadership put out a call for independent observers to come to the prison, to intercede for them, and bear witness to the merits of their grievances, and the good faith of their desire to negotiate a peaceful settlement. They asked that the nation’s leading civil rights advocate of the day, William Kunstler, come to the prison and act as their attorney. They named other prominent citizens they knew were concerned with prisons or prisoners in some way: State Assemblyman Arthur O. Eve, perhaps the one public figure in the state of New York who had previously expressed public concern about the conditions and treatment of prisoners at Attica; New York Times columnist Tom Wicker, who had written about problems in the prisons; New York State Senator John Dunne, head of the Senate Committee which supposedly oversaw the administration of the prisons, publisher Clarence Jones of the Amsterdam News, Congressman Herman Badillo, and many others, on a list that grew and grew. Most of them came; as many as 50 were there at various times in the five days. Kunstler arrived and went inside, to raucous welcoming cheers from this eager, charged-up crowd of new clients.

The authorities first planned to go in immediately, with state police forces that were being assembled, and guards, to recapture the yard; but instead, and to his short-lived credit, the state Corrections Commissioner, Russell Oswald, came from Albany to negotiate. With several members of the press, and TV cameramen, Oswald and his assistant Walter Dunbar went into the Yard and sat down at the table with a council of prisoners; they talked about the demands. Oswald agreed to several of them and promised to study others, and discuss them outside and return. They were accompanied by television cameras, and the spectacle of prisoners controlling part of the prison and publicly negotiating for humane treatment with the Commissioner of Corrections, captured the attention of the American public.

When Oswald came outside the prison, however, apparently not realizing that the prisoners would see him on television, he denounced them for refusing to release the hostages immediately; they saw him, and saw and heard that he showed a different face, and betrayed their trust. The observers committee went inside and another day passed in discussion of grievances and remedies, and terms. A new set of three demands emerged as the prisoners’ terms for ending the standoff: Point One: That the Warden, Mancusi, be replaced; Point Two, That prisoners who wished to, be removed and deported to “a non-imperialist country”; and Three: That there be an Amnesty, for all those involved in the rebellion, from prosecution for crimes alleged as part of it. Needless to say, this was much tougher to negotiate. Oswald did not come back inside the Yard after he was denounced. He met with the Observers, but held out little hope of compromise.

Over the weekend a guard who had been hit in the head in the early stages of uprising, when the big gate broke and prisoners surged into Times Square, died from his injuries. Now, hypothetically at least, everyone in the riot was responsible under the felony-murder rule, where the felony was the riot; so now, amnesty became the primary issue. The guards and state police, waiting outside day after day, full of hostility since the beginning and bombarded by false rumors, were now seething; and the Observers felt a massacre would take place if a settlement was not reached. They urged Governor Nelson Rockefeller to come to the prison and meet with them, give assurances against mass prosecution, and particularly to see the state of high emotion the police forces were in, spoiling for the attack. Several urged that he replace the officers with National Guard troops, who had also called out and were ready and much more prepared to carry out a re-taking; but he wouldn’t. He did give an order that the prison guards stay out of the assault force, but it was ignored.

The Governor declined to come. He told the Observers on that Sunday he felt it would do no good, that there was an impasse, and he had no choice but to order an armed assault on the yard, to rescue the hostages and put down the rebellion. They convinced him to wait at least until the next day, so that people at home on Sunday would not see it on TV and start riots of their own.

After three days of fitful negotiations, during which the hostages were safely guarded by the Muslim prisoners, and the prisoner negotiators, aided by the outside observers, attempted to reach a resolution that would insure meaningful changes, and amnesty from reprisals and prosecutions, Governor Rockefeller moved to re-take the D-Yard by force.

Tom Wicker, Sen. Dunne, Congressman Badillo and Clarence Jones, who had been friends with Rockefeller for years, all warned him urgently­based on their harrowing passage each day through the masses of heavily armed, white prison guards and state police waiting just outside the walls, their racist rage fueled by false rumors of inmate atrocities­that an attack would result in a “bloodbath”. Conventional wisdom and plain common sense dictated waiting until prisoners would tire of holding out, so that some compromise for peaceable surrender could be arranged, but the Governor ordered the state police to prepare to attack. Rockefeller still harbored presidential aspirations, and obviously did not want to appear soft on prisoners, or law and order generally; it was an opportunity for him to make hay politically, and he seized it. His only, wholly self-serving “concession” was to postpone the assault from Sunday to Monday morning. As Congressman Badillo lamented bitterly afterwards, “What was the hurry? There’s always time to die.”

** ** ** ** **
That Sunday it rained all night; by morning D-Yard was a sea of mud and everyone was soaked, cold and miserable. Commissioner Oswald made one last demand for surrender over the P.A. system. Some prisoners took some of the hostages onto the “catwalk”, the one- story roof over the long corridors which divided the interior yards, crossing at Times Square. They stood spaced out on two sides, blindfolded, each guarded by a prisoner with some apparent stabbing device held at the neck. Then an National Guard helicopter flew low over the Yard; and some prisoners believed it was Rockefeller, come at last. Instead it blew a huge cloud of military-grade CS gas into the mass of men and mud; Oswald and the police commanders were told by General O’Hara, the National Guard commander, the CS would “put them on the ground”, to defeat resistance, and it did. Within seconds every one of the 1300 men in the yard was face down in the mud, gasping for breath; then the shooting started…

Marksmen on the high roofs opposite D-Yard quickly felled everyone on the catwalk­killing two of the hostage shields themselves, and several of their “executioner” escorts­as helmeted squads broke over and through the barricades the rebels had built on the far catwalks. One shield hostage, Attica guard Michael Smith, shot four times in the gut by the attack force, said his life was saved when the prisoner holding him, Donald Noble , put his own body in the way of the shooting, to shield him. Michael Smith said he never understood why his own people kept shooting at him, or in truth, why the assault was necessary at all. He had appeared on a TV broadcast the day before in which several hostages had urged the Governor to come to the prison and get things settled peacefully, another plea the Governor spurned.[1]
As the squads came out on the catwalks above the D-Yard, several with long guns took up positions along the length of the roofs and began shooting into the mass of men huddled in the mud, clearly oblivious to the presence of the hostages in the middle of the yard, several more of whom died in that barrage. The “turkey shoot” lasted some fifteen minutes, from when the snipers opened fire to when the supposed covering fire ended, and the squads of guards and state police swarmed down ladders into the Yard. More than four thousand rounds were fired, many of them dum-dum bullets. One hundred-eighty-nine of the 1300-odd men in the yard were hit, of whom 39 were killed, 29 prisoners and 10 hostages, counting those on the catwalk, by rifle and shotgun fire. Several more of both were maimed for life, because of the denial and delay of medical care. Many who died had been left to bleed to death, lying in the mud. No records were kept of which officers fired which weapons, and they made a point of mixing them up afterwards and then bulldozed all the evidence into a dirt pile in back of the prison, so that the killers could not be traced.

White revolutionary Sam Melville, the alleged “Manhattan bomber”, was murdered in cold blood, with his hands in the air in surrender, by State Police Detective Vincent Tobia, who hurried along the catwalk, stopped, aimed down, and fired a shotgun into his chest from 15-20 feet away­and later testified proudly that he had done it. The firebrand and prisoner spokesman L.D. Barkley was also killed, with credible evidence that he was seen alive after the retaking, but later executed. The issue was never resolved.

Some three dozen ambulances had been mustered outside, but they were reserved for the hostages, whether or not they were injured. No medical care had been planned for the prisoners and the National Guard was forced to step in, without advance preparations or any adequate supplies. More than an hour after the shooting stopped , Warden Mancusi called Dr. Worthington Schenk, the head of emergency services at Meyer Memorial Hospital, the big city hospital in Buffalo and told him they had a problem he should come look out. With no idea of the massacre he was about to encounter, Schenk got two residents and drove the 45 miles to Attica. Only when he got there did he see the horror before him and call back to Buffalo for emergency medical services. Meanwhile at least six prisoners had died needlessly, while scores lay in agony for hours waiting for medical care. .[2]

After the shooting stopped, the officers on the ladders were joined by many more coming through the tunnels, as a small state police helicopter circled overhead, with a loudspeaker booming repeatedly, “Surrender to an officer. You will not be harmed”. The officers quickly began clubbing the gasping, unresisting men to their feet, including many who were wounded, and driving them across the yard to a doorway in one of the tunnels, across the tunnel and out the door opposite into the adjacent A-Yard on the other side. They had to go up five or six steps to the door, across the tunnel, then back down. Inside and out they were met with more officers, who beat them and tore their clothes off, took away glasses, watches, false teeth, etc, then put them naked in a long snaking line that wound slowly through the yard leading into the other tunnel, next to A-Yard­which led into the A Cellblock, its cells now emptied to hold them­where a gauntlet awaited them. Those who were considered leaders, the prisoner negotiators, spokesmen and security men were singled out for prolonged abuse and isolation.

As they waited in that long line which many people have seen in the lurid photographs that became hallmarks of that day, listening to the cries of those who preceded them into the tunnel, and the shouts and curses of the officers who lined the tunnel with rifles and axe handles, beating them, another preliminary torment was also enacted upon them. There was one prisoner everyone knew as Big Black (Frank Smith), a maximum leader during the days in the Yard, chosen as the over-all chief of security, and head of the escort squad that protected Oswald and Dunbar, and then the Observers, when they moved in and out of the yard. Mostly a smalltime hustler from the streets of Brooklyn, he had been in Attica for several years­basically because of rotten lawyering, and conflict of interest, whereby he got a sentence three or four times longer than what he should have had­but he had not become involved in any of the political activities or groups which had developed there, except as audience. A large, dark-skinned man, very direct but with a ready, friendly smile, he coached the cellblock football team, worked in the laundry, and was on good terms with everyone, all groups; everyone respected him, even the police. But they changed their attitude during the five days, as he stayed at the center of things, directing the security force, and turned up repeatedly at the gate where the visitors came and went..

Now as the smoke cleared and the huddled men started struggling up, officers came through the crowd shouting for “Big Black! Where’s Big Black?”. They found him, beat him and stripped him, and took him across into the A-Yard. There they laid him on a steel table near the door where the curving line fed into the gauntlet, with the middle of the back of his head at one edge lengthwise, a and the other end reaching to mid-thigh. They beat him more, especially in the groin and testicles, cursing him loudly, and stubbing out cigarettes on his body. Officers stood above him on the catwalk and would hold empty shell casings in the flame of a lighter until they were too hot, then drop them on his body. They put a football under his chin and made him hold it against his chest, and told him that if it fell he would be castrated, or shot. They left him there for the others to see, keeping it up for more than five hours, as the line slowly snaked past him into the tunnel.

Inside the tunnel the floor was strewn with broken glass for some 50 yards, to the A-Block gate, and both sides were lined with officers with ax handles, 2x4s, baseball bats and rifle butts. The naked prisoners had to run, or, when they were tripped or knocked down, stumble and crawl the length of it, being struck and jabbed repeatedly over the whole distance, by violently freaked-out, cursing, sworn peace officers of the State of New York, all white men. Inside the cellblock they were herded up the stairs and into the cells­four or five men stuffed into single cells, including many who needed medical attention. There they remained, naked, ill fed, and often terrorized through the night by officers who came in with flashlights and threatened to shoot them, frequently cocking and dry-firing rifles, shotguns, and pistols at them, and promising much more death and mayhem to come, for the next 3-4-5 days.

Big Black was finally taken off the table at about four in the afternoon­after about five hours­and over to the hospital, outside the main building. There he was put in a small room with several guards armed with clubs who resumed beating and kicking him, on the floor, until a National Guard medical officer chanced to open the door and found him, and that was the end of it. Twenty years later he broke down weeping on the witness stand while describing this day, in the class-action civil rights trial­despite having told the story many times­when the memory hit him full force; he was the first of several witnesses this happened to in the trial.

Afterwards, a news photographer found and recorded a pair of inscriptions, in separate hands, written with a white marker on a dark steel wall, that told the story. The top one said: “Attika fell 9-9-71. Fuck you pig.” Just underneath that, it said: “Retaken 9-13-71. 32 Dead Niggers.”

** ** ** ** **
The prison officials falsely announced to the world that the dead hostages had been killed by prisoners slitting their throats, and emasculating one of them, which they said they had seen, and which left them “no choice” but to attack. When autopsies showed that all hostages died from gunshot wounds from the lawmen’s weapons, state officials denounced local pathologist John Edland as a communist, and tried to discredit his findings. As Mark Twain said, A lie will travel half-way around the world before the truth gets its boots on: three years later, when the Erie County population in and around Buffalo was polled in preparation for jury selection in the first criminal trials, it was found that fully a third of the public still believed that the dead Attica hostages had been murdered by the prisoners.
The truth could not be suppressed however, and the massacre, one of the two or three largest slaughters of Americans by other Americans since the Civil War,[3] was acknowledged in an official investigation, the McKay Commission Report.

There had been no plan to rescue the hostages, they were simply sacrificed at the altar of race hate, and, in aid of Rockefeller’s political ambitions, the need to make it clear that resistance would not be tolerated. The U.S. Court of Appeals denounced the so-called “re-housing” of the prisoners after the assault as “an orgy of brutality”.

To add insult to the grave injury, many of the surviving victims of the massacre and torture at Attica were later indicted by a local grand jury, made up of friends and neighbors of the prison guards, and run by a Rockefeller intimate, Robert E. Fischer, a former judge now appointed as a special attorney general, with a large task force of lawyers and ex-state police cops as investigators, which looked into alleged crimes by the prisoners, and studiously ignored those of the police and state officials. A later state investigation uncovered intentional killing of unarmed prisoners by the state assault force, but was suppressed, and­with the exception of one hapless trooper, who was indicted for “reckless endangerment”, for discharging his shotgun twelve times to “keep up the noise”, as he put it­no charges were ever filed against the police.

Sixty-two prisoners were indicted in December 1972, charged with more than 1400 felony counts all together, more than half of which carried a life sentence upon conviction. Lawyers and activists from all over the United States came to Western New York to defend them. Attica Brothers Legal Defense (ABLD) was born, combining the legal defense with investigation of the crimes of the State actors, public education, and fundraising, and justice for the Attica Brothers became a nation-wide political issue. The main demand was to drop the charges, and jail Rockefeller and the police killers. Hundreds of people demonstrated in Buffalo, where the trials were to be held; thousands participated in one great march in September, 1974, when the first frame-up trials were about to start. Many of those who came to work for ABLD, including the authors of this article, had their lives dramatically changed by the Brothers’ example of militancy and courage, and the reality of how far the State was willing to go to suppress the rights and righteous protest of prisoners. In all, five trials (involving eight Attica Brothers) were held with four acquittals and one conviction.

A national political campaign was initiated, under the leadership of Big Black, whose experience at Attica had transformed him into a committed activist. Dozens of lawyers and young people volunteered, organized and demonstrated, forcing official investigations which exposed the planning and cover-up of the killings and torture. In late 1974 a young lawyer on the special prosecutor’s staff, Malcolm Bell, quit in disgust after his efforts to develop cases against officers were repeatedly blocked by the higher-ups. He went to the New York Times with his story, and soon a big expose appeared on the front page, telling the world what everyone involved in the case knew well: that the special investigation was a completely one-sided fraud. An investigation of the investigation was launched, and, ultimately, a new governor, Hugh Carey, was pressured to give amnesty to the indicted Attica Brothers, and clemency for two who had already been convicted calling the Attica prosecutions the “darkest day in the history of New York jurisprudence.” Twenty years and tens of thousands of work-hours later, despite the concerted efforts of the state officials to delay and defeat any public accounting for what was done, a class-action civil suit on behalf of the Brothers in D yard was tried in federal court in Buffalo. For the first time the full extent of the killing, brutality and denial of medical care inflicted on the men of Attica was publicly exposed.

The jury found that the rights of the class members were denied in the assault, and by the brutality inflicted upon them after the prison was retaken, but split, and hung, over whether any of the four officials on trial were responsible; they assigned blame for the beatings in the yard and the tunnel, and other tortures done that day, to just one assistant warden, Karl Pfeil, the only one of the four who was part of the planning and then personally oversaw the brutality in the yard and the tunnel. They hung again on responsibility for the torture as to the other three defendants: Commissioner Oswald, who had died; Major Monahan of the State Police, commander of the assault force, also deceased; and the Warden himself, Mancusi. At a subsequent trial for damages another jury returned an award of $4 million in damages for Big Black, and a third verdict awarded $75,000 to David Broesig, selected as an example of someone who suffered the average level of harm common to all prisoner class members not singled out for special vengeance after the assault.

Refusing to resolve the case, the State appealed the liability verdict; and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, still beholden to the legacy of Rockefeller­and obviously determined to protect the State of New York from liability for the tens of millions of dollars the two damage verdicts showed that the Brothers were entitled to, and to block the sensation of so much money being paid to rebellious convicts­refused to recognize the legal validity of the class of prisoners, and set the jury verdicts aside. Faced with the impossibility of returning the Square One with 1200-odd individual cases, as ordered by the Court, and the likelihood of further prolonged delay, uncertainty, and clearly impossible expense, the Brothers still involved in 1999 bowed to an inadequate settlement, for a total of 12 million dollars including attorneys fees for a quarter-century of legal work. This meant that most of the survivors got paid a few thousand dollars, which, in light of the two damage awards, was a wretched pittance for what they went through.

** ** ** ** **
For a time, the horrific events at Attica, followed by several other less publicized prison uprisings and riots elsewhere, fueled nation-wide efforts for prison reform. Programs for prisoners and ex-prisoners were instituted throughout the country and for the first time people began to be sympathetic to the rights of prisoners, and to realize the importance of realistic efforts at rehabilitation. Prisoner rights legal programs were established in almost every state and many prison reform and watchdog groups sprung up. It was a period of political militancy and unrest throughout the country, and there were the beginnings of awareness in many sectors of the population that prisoners were subject to widespread mistreatment and abuse by their captors. Even the federal courts­often as a result of prisoners acting as their own lawyers­had begun to recognize for the first time that prisoners had constitutional rights, to due process prior to discipline and parole denial, first amendment access to literature and mail, and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment in the form of deplorable prison conditions.

But it didn’t last. Before long the renewed emphasis on prisoner rights, and prison reform, began to evaporate in the heat of the nascent ‘war on drugs’­especially in New York, with the infamous Rockefeller Drug Laws­and “tough on crime” politics generally. In the mid 1970’s a series of decisions in the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the protections earlier envisioned as guarantees of prisoners’ welfare, and dignity, and instead sanctioned supposed due process rules, which prison officials could satisfy by simply creating bureaucratic procedures and paper records in dealing with complaints and disciplinary actions, which in fact rarely if ever were decided in prisoners’ favor, and never when it was the prisoner’s word against the guard’s.

And, rather than implement programs of rehabilitation, prison technocrats throughout the country began to develop special solitary confinement units­control units­with sensory deprivation cells, where they isolated people they identified as activist and politically aware prisoners. Public support for reform and rehabilitation waned, and Attica for many was just past history. Then, as time went on, mandatory sentencing, increased penalties for drug crimes, gang proscriptions and an epidemic of “three-strike” laws and other sentencing “enhancements”, resulted in a virtual incarceration explosion in America. Dozens, really hundreds of new prisons were built, all over the country, replete with every phenomenally complex, expensive, high-tech electronic security and surveillance system and device that anyone could invent, especially if it could be sold to government in large quantities. From 1972 until the present the total U.S. prison population increased from about 400,000 to more than 2,300,000 today, as the prison-industrial complex has blossomed into big business, with big corporate profits.

During that time, the upswing in popular consciousness flowing from the disgrace and vanquishing of Nixon, and the end of the Viet Nam war­as well as response to earlier events like the shootings at Kent State and Jackson State, along with Attica­soon leveled off in Gerald Ford’s “stagflation”, and the weirdness of the Carter presidency, suddenly blown up by the hostage crisis in Iran. Then came an election in which­besides being snookered by Reagan agents in a secret deal with the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the election, to deny him the campaign triumph of bringing them home­Carter was simply over-matched. More to the point, Reagan and his ad agency handlers ran an overtly racist campaign­brazenly kicking it off in Philadelphia, Mississippi, site of the notorious slaughter of three young civil rights workers in 1964, and denouncing “welfare queens” and supposed freeloaders­appealing shamelessly to the prejudice of white working-class people in cities filled with “Reagan Democrats”, and trumpeting the politics of anti-communism and crime, while building the atmosphere of fear and selfishness in which those politics would thrive; as they did. The backlash had arrived.

From there on­“We’re going to move this country so far to the right you won’t recognize it,” crowed the Congressman-turned-Reagan Budget Director David Stockman, as he began to engineer the first of the preposterous tax cuts for the rich people and big corporations that led to the Country’s present evident bankruptcy­governance was more and more a matter of conscious stage management. The perfect actor was in the presidential role, and he set a tone of truculence, and unyielding, moralistic harshness, with unmistakable racial undertones, that was perfectly adapted to the emerging uses of mass incarceration. As the American population came to identify more and more as the “Me Generation”, and activist elements­beleaguered by FBI “counterintelligence” (COINTELPRO) and kindred programs of repression all over the country­largely drifted into the by-ways of identity politics, administrators of growing bureaucratic empires in state prison departments systematically set aside what federal judge Marvin Frankel once identified as an “elementary” understanding, that “people are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment.”

Finally, the larger trend was sealed with the awful story of Willie Horton, by the ghastly, successful, racist exploitation of it in the 1988 presidential campaign of George Bush the elder (first former head of the C.I.A. to become president)­and to a important degree, just about every campaign for high office thereafter. The 'lock-em-up & forget 'em' mentality became an article of faith across the political spectrum, and has flourished.[4] Rehabilitation, education and training programs wilted, everywhere, with the supposedly excessive cost­in the growing “big government is the problem” atmosphere ­always the cover story. In reality, prisons old and new were filling up with drug offenders, and alleged members of “criminal street gangs”, who were growing up on streets where the would-be revolution of the 60s and 70s was now played out, and a flood of illicit drugs played in; apparently a great deal of it by the CIA and associated instrumentalities of capitalist culture. The politics that had been rife in the prisons at the time of Attica gave way to internal red–blue rivalries among both Latinos and Blacks, and inter-racial conflicts, often systematically promoted and manipulated by jailors who were well aware that ‘if they’re fighting each other , they’re not fighting us…’ With such an approach, the prison system became the focal point for a much-heightened level of social control of populations, especially Black and Brown men, who were increasingly crowded out of a shrinking labor market, as whole industries continued to be dismantled, exported, and made obsolete.

Outside, anti-drug propaganda and legislative scourgings of drug and gang defendants suffused the public sphere. The Supreme Court did its part with one anti-human ruling after another­meaning decisions where the iron law that power corrupts people was studiously ignored­granting the jailors and wardens more and more arbitrary power and discretion over the intimate daily lives of convicts, shrinking further and further the process of any accountability for, or recourse from, the many perverse ways they used that power, and teaching the lower courts to defer to prison officials whenever possible­again barely showing even the slightest awareness of the likelihood that the power they conferred would be abused. In the midst of this transition, the Control Unit paradigm continued to gain strength.

Possibly the first control unit as such was established in what was then the federal maximum security institution­the notion of “maxi-maxi”, now morphed to “supermax” was just coming into play­at Marion, in downstate Illinois, also a substantially “up South” region. Prisons had always had solitary confinement units for punishing rule violations, but the idea here was different, namely, that certain prisoners had to be permanently separated from the general population, because of their supposed influence on other prisoners. At Attica before the rebellion, prisoners overtly involved in prison and political issues or organizing were just beginning to be recognized, and grouped together dealt with together; indeed it was just such a grouping, from a certain tier, “5th Company”, including Sam Melville and L.D. Barkley and several others killed on the 13th, that started up with the officers in the tunnel when they found the door locked, and brought on the riot. At Marion, authorities decided that certain prisoners associated with protest inside, or political causes on the outside, or both, men respected by other prisoners­as well as some whose resistance was more directly acted out­ should be subjected to programs of “behavior modification”, in the form of prolonged isolation, with basically uncertain terms for release, whereby they could be conditioned to submission, so to speak; which is to say, broken.

The idea caught on. The courts, predictably, accepted it; determining that as long as the prisoner was let out of doors for an hour or so each day, or maybe every other day, he could be kept locked up alone all the rest of the time­or at least until he would be deemed by officials to have satisfied some gobbledegook standard or prescription for correct conduct, or had served a peremptory minimum term, perhaps fixed by the government shrinks who now began to appear in profusion, to certify the supposed need for this new regimen in general and in each case. All the officials had to say was that confinement in the unit was not intended as punishment; and they were quickly learning how to pronounce whatever formulaic justifications and rationales the courts said they needed to hear…

Soon isolation units were being established in prisons everywhere, and it was not long before they were being specially constructed in new prisons. An early refinement was construction of isolation cells which each had its own adjacent outdoor space, to eliminate the need to move prisoners outside their cells. These were “dog pens” were similarly cramped (usual cell size would be 6x8 feet, the little yards maybe 6x10) with nothing but high, blank walls and a patch of sky, which the sun or moon might or might not ever pass over. The front doors of the cells would be solid, maybe with a pattern of small holes for ventilation, and a meal slot, openable from outside only, where the food is shoved in on a tray, and where you have to back up and stick your hands out behind you through the opening, to be cuffed and chained, before you can ever come out for any reason. Many cells are painted white entirely, and some are reputed to have rounded angles at the tops of the walls, so the eyes are deprived even of the tiny stimulus of a ceiling line. Usually a light is kept burning all the time. In the SHU at Pelican Bay­an isolation unit inside an isolation prison­you’re permitted your “appliance”, a small-screen TV which also picks up (and is sometimes rigged by staff to not pick up), one or more local or regional radio stations; and you have a small space for property, including the boxes of your transcripts and legal materials (if these have not been confiscated).

These units came to be all the rage in U.S. “penology”, especially as gangs and supposed gangs began to proliferate during the 1980’s; and before long whole prisons were being designed and built for long term solitary confinement, based on so-called “classification”, and typically located as far as possible from population centers, to discourage visiting and promote the feeling and pressure of isolation. The federal government built one in the Colorado mountains, at Florence; Illinois put theirs at Tamms, all the way at the other end of the state from Chicago, and California put one as far away from Los Angeles as they could get; about 780 miles north, at Pelican Bay. Again, many of the locations chosen were distinctively “up South”…

And if you build it, you have to keep it full, to justify the trouble and expense; so you have to have a steady supply of dangerous characters you can classify as in need of segregation from the others, in long-term lockdown; “the worst of the worst” is the ominous description always used. As the prison population swelled in the 80’s and 90’s, and the great red vs. blue gang rivalries developed on the streets and inside, prison officials more and more used supposed “validation” of gang membership as the criterion for assignment to “special housing units”, and, like other political figures, used propaganda about the supposed menace of the gangs, and the difficulties and dangers of dealing with them, to encourage and maintain public indifference to what prisoners were going through inside.

SHU isolation obviously falls short of the vile regimen of dogs, nakedness, hoods, and the rest, ordained by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and worked up by the Army and the CIA at Abu Ghraib, Bagram and all those places they had for prisoners taken in the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nevertheless, particularly in light of the manifest intention to degrade and break those subjected to it, and the institutional as well as individual disposition to de-humanize them, it absolutely qualifies as torture under both U.S. and International Law. Particularly with respect to alleged gang members who are locked down, there is the added feature that the regimen of enforced isolation and sensory deprivation is explicitly designed to extract information, in the form of so-called “de-briefing” of information about the gang and other gang members, which brings it still more solidly within the legal definition of torture.[5] Indeed in California and other places, de-briefing, and the Catch-22 the demand for it creates for prisoners marked by authorities as gang members, and confined in the SHU on that basis, has become a burning issue within the larger issue of long-term confinement generally. De-briefing­in which the prison “intelligence” officers will insist that your betrayal of the gang and gang members be so abject and complete that “they will never accept you back”­puts a target for vengeance on your back for life, as everyone knows, and also greatly endangers your whole family on the outside; and most prisoners understand that, regardless of the promises they make, sooner or later the police will leave you exposed; and the likelihood is you’ll be in solitary again until then. It is not a realistic option­as the authorities well know, much as they also know that after years on end in the SHU there’s nothing much a prisoner can know about gang action that’s of any use at all­still that is the impossible hoop they hold up for these men to jump through. Some have been confined the whole time the tormentarium has been open; 20 years, and even before that. No wonder there were no scruples at Abu Ghraib…

** ** ** ** **
Most recently, first in Georgia, then briefly in Ohio, and now in California just this summer (2011), prisoners held in long-term isolation units were driven to the point of mass hunger strikes; and prisoners in the SHU at Pelican Bay were able to organize theirs despite their concerted isolation. The PB strike plan drew unified support across racial lines inside, a remarkable development, and accomplishment, which apparently helped the message to spread to other prisons up and down the state. The strike was planned ahead for weeks, and for once there was strong, effective support outside, resulting particularly in broad coverage in the press, usually so oblivious to conditions in the prisons.[6] The brothers who initiated it said they were hoping maybe three or four hundred people at Pelican Bay would participate, then after about two weeks more than six thousand prisoners, in at least 12 institutions statewide, had refused meals in support of the strike and its core demands; including an end to the de-briefing requirement.

After three weeks, an assistant commissioner came from Sacramento and sat down at a table with prisoner representatives, and also allowed them to hold a conference call with a team of outside negotiators that had formed to help and intercede for them. Some token concessions were made regarding living conditions, along with a promise that the need and possibility for changes in the SHU system would be discussed within the state administration, and further talks would then be held. Believing they had made real progress, especially in gaining public attention and getting a promised hearing on SHU conditions and policies scheduled in the State Assembly, the prisoners agreed to accept these assurances, in good faith but without illusions, and see what would happen. The four strike leaders sent out this message:
We’ll see soon enough where the CDCR is really coming from. More important is the fact that while the Strike is over, the resistance and struggle to end our subjection to human rights violations and torture in the SHU is just beginning!! We’ve drawn the line on this, and should the CDCR fail to carry out meaningful changes in a timely fashion, we will initiate a class action suit and additional types of peaceful protest­we will not stop until the CDCR ends illegal policies and practices in the SHU.

We’re counting on all of our outside supporters to continue to collectively support us, and carry on shining a light on our resistance in here. This is the time for change in these prisons, and the movement to do so is growing across the land. Without the people’s support outside, we can not be successful!! All support, no matter the size and content, comes together as a powerful force; we’ve already brought more mainstream exposure about these SHUs than ever before, and our time for real change to this system is now!!! (emphasis added)

It is true that, in keeping with the increasing dog-eat-dog reality of American life in general, street gangs in many places, and drug dealers everywhere­in the predictable chaos arising from the country’s failure to learn from its experience that prohibition doesn’t work­disrupted society and often preyed on their own communities. But the fact is, a substantial majority of prisoners are jailed for non-violent offenses, and are themselves victims of a racist system that denies them opportunities for education, and any real chance at all for decent jobs.

Moreover, most prisoners will be released at some time, despite the huge sentences so heedlessly put on so many of them. If they don’t receive education and training in prison, and instead are maltreated, disrespected and hopelessly idle and bored; and then there are no jobs upon their release, the cycle of crime and incarceration will obviously continue; as it has. To our enormous cost in all ways. Currently, almost two-thirds of prisoners who get out commit another crime within three years of release. In California, huge numbers are returned to prison for the most minor, non-criminal infractions of parole conditions, as a matter of policy, decreed by the State’s punishment overlords. Only now, because of the tax-debt-budget crisis fomented in the political sphere­and in California, certainly, the recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a lower court order, after many years of litigation, that the State must move or release some 30,000 prisoners, almost one-fifth of its total, to relieve over-crowding­is there renewed impetus to look seriously at who is sent to prison, why and on what terms, and what happens to them when they’re released.

Despite the difficult climate, prisoners continue to organize and protest inside; and, finally, hopefully, as the depredations of the rich classes on the society as a whole awaken the conscience of more and more people, especially youth, there is a rejuvenation of support groups on the outside. The recent protests embodied in the hunger strike and its public support, following earlier work inside and outside challenging the gouging of prisoners and their families by phone companies, in cahoots with ‘corrections’ officials, are examples that show that the spirit of resistance is still alive.

It should be clear to us, however, that a prison reform movement based on the fiscal needs of different governments will not bring about real change. Unless we begin to de-construct the whole system that denies real opportunity to so large and growing numbers of people, and transform the class-based and racist enforcement structures of the criminal justice system, prisons will continue to be used as warehouses, and torment centers, for those who are expendable in the larger political economy, especially those who act out their resentment or resistance in any way. We need a movement that demands an end to discrimination and exploitation, as well as draconian prison sentences, conditions and treatment, and fights for equal opportunity, education and decent jobs. Prisons should be reserved for only the truly dangerous, always with the goal of rehabilitation and release, and with adequate resources provided to bring both about in positive ways.

We do well to hearken back to the revolutionary spirit that motivated the Attica rebellion: a demand for justice led by those who are oppressed. But we must remember as well the message from the Brothers at Pelican Bay: Without the people’s support outside, we cannot be successful!! As Big Black said: Wake Up America! Nothing comes to a Sleeper But a Dream!

********************8
Dennis Cunningham, Michael Deutsch, and Elizabeth Fink, along with Joseph Heath, were staff attorneys at Attica Brothers Legal Defense in Buffalo throughout the criminal trial phase which ended in February, 1976. They continued as lawyers for the Attica Brothers in the civil suit that was begun in 1974 and finally ended in 2001.



[1] Michael Smith remains a stalwart witness for and friend and supporter of the surviving Attica Brothers, four decades afterwards, and will be present in NYC to join in the 40th anniversary commemorations.

[2] The famous pathologist Michael Baden reviewed the autopsy reports and testified in the trial in 1991 that Sam Melville and L.D. Barkley, both wounded in the lungs, both might well have been saved if they had received timely medical attention when the shooting stopped.

[3] More people were slaughtered by the U.S. Army at (the first) Wounded Knee, for example, in 1890, and at Sand Creek, Idaho, in 1875; and as many or more probably also died in the race riots at Tulsa in 1921…

[4] In the 90’s Bill Clinton, the hustler president, aiming as he did so often to beat the reactionaries at their own game, flogged and then signed the so-called Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), which basically shut down federal relief from wrongful convictions of state prisoners; and the Prison Litigation Reform Act, in reality a litigation suppression act, which put huge, really malicious and legally perverse impediments on civil rights lawsuits by prisoners, and lawyers trying to represent them.

[5] The Geneva Convention Against Torture states: PART I , Article 1, 1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. * * * *
Article 2 , 1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction. 2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. 3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
U.S. Law, Title 18, Sec 2340 of the U.S. Code is more restrictive, requiring infliction or threat of pain, or forced drugging or some similar extension beyond simply “any act” by which severe mental pain is inflicted…

[6] Indeed the mighty New York Times itself has granted coverage, and, belatedly as to PB but in terms that were admirably straight from the shoulder, considering, demanded that long-term isolation be ended. See, “Cruel Isolation”, NYT editorial, August 1, 2011 NEED LINK In contrast, the close-by supposedly liberal San Francisco Chronicle was happy to banner-headline the low-life propaganda smear from the authorities, that the always-handy-to-take-the-blame gangs were enforcing the strike; then were silent on the whole affair when a peaceful compromise was reached, obligating CDCR to consider real changes, and negotiate further, to end the strike. That’s not news, in their commanding view, meaning it’s not something positive about these supposed ‘worst of the worst’­who our state holds in such deep torment that they begin to starve themselves in protest­that they have any interest in having their readership learn about… See, “Gang ties alleged in hunger strike” (full-page headline, Bay Area section, July 14, 2011)




Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org


Questions and comments may be sent to claude@freedomarchives.org

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

ACLU, Prison Legal News Sue Sheriff Babeu to End Censorship at Pinal County Jail

From Prison Legal News and the ACLU-AZ

--------------------------


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, September 7, 2011

CONTACT:

Arizona: Alessandra Soler Meetze, ACLU of Arizona, (602) 773-6006 (office) ameetze@acluaz.org

Washington: Paul Wright, Prison Legal News, (802) 257-1342,
pwright@prisonlegalnews.org


Phoenix, AZ – Prison Legal News (PLN), represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona (ACLU) and the law firm of Rosen, Bien & Galvan LLP, today filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a Pinal County Jail policy that prohibits inmates from receiving any magazines, hardcover books or letters of more than one page in length. The lawsuit, which was filed against Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu and Pinal County, argues this “postcard-only” policy amounts to censorship and prevents inmates from receiving Prison Legal News, a non- profit monthly journal that reports on corrections news and prisoners’ rights issues.

“Publishers have a well-established First Amendment right to send their publications and books to prisoners, and it is unfortunate that rather than respect the rights of publishers to communicate with inmates Sheriff Babeu continues to try to defend the indefensible by banning our books and magazines," said Paul Wright editor of PLN, which distributes approximately 40 book titles including self-help, educational and criminal justice-related publications.

According to the complaint, paperback books (limited to 3) are the only exception to the policy and those must be from “an approved publisher.” Over the past six months, jail officials have refused to deliver several PLN publications, including Prison Legal News and other informational brochures, citing “not allowed,” “only 1-page letters allowed,” or “not from an approved publisher,” and have also failed to deliver copies of PLN’s paperback books. The materials provide inmates with information on matters of concern, ranging from addressing their basic health and safety needs to litigating federal civil rights claims.

“As implemented by Sheriff Babeu, the postcard-only policy is clearly unconstitutional and serves as an excuse to censor books and magazines for no good reason,” added ACLU of Arizona Legal Director Dan Pochoda. “Jail officials who are serious about lowering recidivism and increasing public safety recognize that cutting inmates off from the outside world and denying them access to periodicals is counterproductive.”

PLN is asking the court to order Sheriff Babeu to cease the unconstitutional practice of censoring PLN and limiting inmate mail to short messages on postcards, and to compensate PLN for past and continuing injuries caused by the censorship. The case is Prison Legal News v. Babeu, U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. In addition to Pochoda, PLN also is represented by Ernest Galvan and Kenneth M. Walczak of Rosen, Bien & Galvan, LLP in San Francisco, and Lance Weber, in-house counsel for the non-profit Human Rights Defense Center, the parent organization of Prison Legal News.

Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC), founded in 1990 with offices in Brattleboro, Vermont, is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting human rights in U.S. detention facilities. HRDC publishes Prison Legal News, a monthly magazine that includes reports, reviews and analysis of court rulings and news related to prisoners’ rights and criminal justice issues. PLN has approximately 7,000 subscribers nationwide and operates a website (www.prisonlegalnews.org) that includes a comprehensive database of prison and jail-related articles, news reports, court rulings, verdicts, settlements and related documents.

The complaint is available on-line at: www.acluaz.org.

--American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
of Arizona - Media Relations Office
P.O. Box 17148
Phoenix, AZ 85011
Tel: 602-650-1854 Fax: 602-650-1376
http://www.acluaz.org

Saturday, March 26, 2011

The Prisoner's Best Friend: Prison Legal News.

Over the course of the past several months, I've been hearing from a number of survivors of the Arizona state prison system - particularly the loved ones of prisoners who suicided or had been murdered. Unable to get the AZ Department of Corrections to work with me - or even talk with me - around concerns about the high homicide and suicide rate in recent years, I've been focusing my energy on trying to organize these families to take both legal and political action. I don't see any better way to bring about change; if we just wait for the DOJ or ACLU to come riding in to the rescue, more will just die.


That's not to say that the ADC hasn't been scrambling to reduce their exposure to lawsuits by re-evaluating and supplementing their mental health programs. They're in a pitched PR battle with former Eyman Deputy Warden Carl Toersbijns, trying to discredit his work while making the rest of the community think they're really treating mental illness appropriately in the prisons. More on that soon.


I'm sure many of the ADC's staff actually do care and do good work - Carl is evidence of that, and thank god for those folks - but the state just defends their employees' neglect and abuse of prisoners in court; you should see some of the lawsuits that prisoners have brought. So many of the really good ones get dismissed, though, because they "failed to exhaust their administrative remedies" (prisoners MUST file grievances on anything they want to litigate, and appeal them all the way to the director and back - leaving them op
en to retaliation in the process. Even my buddy Davon won't file grievances on being denied treatment for his Hep C, after a year of fighting, because he's afraid he'll lose his good time - he's almost home).


Anyway, here are some guidelines all prisoners need to know about the Prison Litigation Reform Act so they can protect their rights t
o sue the state. This is one of the guides the judiciary uses.


Here are the instructions for filing a complaint with the
ACLU of Arizona; just keep in mind that their interest is in patterns and practices
of neglect and abuse, not litigating individual cases. Arizona prisoners can litigate their own civil rights cases, if they've exhausted all their administrative remedies, by filing this form in the Arizona District Court.


Friends and family members of seriously mentally ill prisoners unable to grieve issues themselves should file written letters of grievance on their behalf, explicitly noting that their psychiatric disability
prevents them from utilizing the grievance system independently. You'll need a written note of consent from the prisoner for the ADC to release medical information to you, or they'll just stonewall - if they have to answer to you, they're more likely to follow up on your concerns. Ask them to accommodate the prisoner's disability by processing your complaint as if it were a grievance. I haven't tried this yet, so I don't know what they'll say - but it can't hurt to have it in the file if the prisoner isn't grieving mistreatment and ends up getting harmed.


Anyway, in the course of my adventures these past few months I've needed to try to help a few families find an attorney to file suit against the state. Our friends Paul Wright and Lance Weber at Prison Legal News have been instrumental in doing just that - Duron Cunningham's mom is the latest to retain a lawyer to file a notice of claim (it should be out any day now). This is a little bit about who they are. I finally just bought a subscription myself this week - it's well worth it.



---------------------------




The History of Prison Legal News

by Paul Wright

In May 1990, the first issue of Prisoners’ Legal News (PLN) was published. It was hand-typed, photocopied and ten pages long. The first issue was mailed to 75 potential subscribers. Its budget was $50. The first 3 issues were banned in all Washington prisons, the first 18 in all Texas prisons. Since then we have published 244 consecutive issues, grown to offset printing of 56-page issues, and now have almost 7,000 paid subscribers in all 50 states as well as numerous other countries. This is how it happened.

In 1987 I entered the Washington state prison system with a 304-month prison sentence. In 1988 I met Ed Mead, a political prisoner and veteran prison activist, at the Washington State Reformatory (WSR) in Monroe, Washington. Ed had been imprisoned since 1976. In that period he had been involved in organizing and litigating around prison conditions and issues. He had also started and published several newsletters, including The Chill Factor, The Red Dragon and The Abolitionist. By late 1988, Ed and I were jointly involved in class action prison conditions litigation and other political work.

As the 1980s ended it became readily apparent that collectively prisoners were in a downhill spiral. Prisoners were suffering serious setbacks on the legislative, political, judicial and media fronts. Prisoners and their families were the people most affected by criminal justice policies, but were also the ones almost entirely absent from what passed as debate. There was a lack of political consciousness and awareness among prisoners, and widespread ignorance about the realities of the prison system among those not incarcerated.

Ed and I decided to republish The Red Dragon as a means of raising political consciousness among social prisoners in the U.S. We planned to model the new Red Dragon on the old one: a 50-60 page Marxist quarterly magazine that Ed had previously published. We eventually put together a draft copy, but it was never printed for distribution. The main reason was the lack of political and financial support on the outside. We lacked the money to print a large quarterly magazine, and were unable to find volunteers outside prison willing to commit the time involved in laying out, printing and mailing a big publication. Additionally, in 1989 I was subjected to a retaliatory transfer to the Penitentiary at Walla Walla, due to success in the WSR overcrowding litigation. Prison officials also wanted to ensure that the Red Dragon never got published. The transfer meant that Ed and I were relegated to communicating by heavily censored mail.

We scaled back our ambitions and instead decided to publish a small, monthly newsletter focusing on prison issues in Washington. If the support was there it would grow. Originally named Prisoners’ Legal News, we set out with the goal of publishing real, timely news that activist prisoners could use.

With the social movements that had traditionally supported the prison movement in this country at a low ebb (i.e., civil rights, women’s liberation and anti-war movements), we saw PLN’s objective as one that would emphasize prisoner organizing and self-reliance. Like previous political journalists who had continued publishing during the dark times of the 1920s and 1950s, we saw PLN’s role as being similar. From the outset, PLN has striven to be an organizing tool as much as we are an information source. When we started we had no idea that things would get as bad as they have in our nation’s criminal justice system.

In 1990 I was transferred to the Clallam Bay Corrections Center, a then-new Washington prison. In May 1990, the first issue of PLN appeared. Ed and I each typed up five pages of PLN in our respective cells. Columns were carefully laid out with blue pencils and graphics applied with a glue stick. We sent the proof copy to Richard Mote, a volunteer in Seattle, who copied and mailed it. Ed contributed PLN’s start-up budget of $50.

The first three issues of PLN were banned in all Washington prisons on spurious grounds. Ed was infracted by WSR officials for allegedly violating copyright laws for writing law articles. Officials at Clallam Bay ransacked my cell and confiscated my writing materials, background information and anything that was PLN-related. Ed’s infraction was eventually dismissed and my materials were later returned.

Just as we were on the verge of filing a civil rights lawsuit challenging the censorship of PLN, the Washington DOC capitulated and allowed PLN into its prisons. Jim Blodgett, then the warden at the Penitentiary in Walla Walla, told me that PLN would never last because its politics were “harmless and outmoded,” and prisoners were too “young and immature to be influenced” by our ideas. The reprisals had been fully expected, given prison officials’ historic hostility to the concept of free speech.

Then disaster struck: Richard Mote turned out to be mentally unstable. He refused to print and mail PLN’s second issue because he took offense to an article by Ed calling for an end to the ostracization of sex offenders. Mote took off with all of PLN’s money that contributors had sent, about $50, the master copy of the second issue and our mailing list. For several weeks it looked like there would be no second issue of PLN. Fortunately we located a second volunteer, Janie Pulsifer, who was willing to print and mail PLN. Ed and I sent Janie another copy of the issue, which she copied and mailed. We were back on track.

The Presses Keep Rolling

Ed’s then-partner, Carey Catherine, had agreed to handle PLN’s finances and accounting, such as they were, after Mote jumped ship. This was short-lived, because by August 1990 she was preparing to go to China to study. The only person we knew who had a post office box who might be able to take care of PLN’s mail, mainly to process donations, was my father, Rollin Wright. He lived in Florida but generously agreed to handle PLN’s mail for what Ed and I thought would be a few months at most, until we found someone in Seattle.

PLN’s support and circulation slowly began to grow. In January 1991, PLN switched to desktop publishing. Ed and I would send our typed articles to Judy Bass and Carrie Roth, who would retype them and lay them out. Ed and I would then proof each issue before it was printed and mailed. In 1991 PLN also obtained 501(c)(3) status from the IRS so we could use lower postage rates. PLN’s circulation had stabilized at around 300 subscribers. We purposely did not seek further growth because we did not have the infrastructure to sustain it. Once we had non-profit status and postal permits from the post office, we were ready to grow.

In the summer of 1992 we did our first sample mailing to prison law libraries. Since PLN’s reader base had grown, and changed, we decided to reflect this change by renaming the magazine Prison Legal News, as PLN wasn’t just for prisoners anymore. PLN was now being photocopied and mailed each month by a group of volunteers in Seattle.

When PLN started out in 1990, Ed and I had decided it would be a magazine of struggle, whether in the courts or elsewhere, and everything would be chronicled. At a time when the prisoner movement was overcome by defeatism and demoralization, we thought it important to report the struggles and the victories as they occurred to let activists know theirs was not a solitary struggle.

A mainstay of PLN’s coverage from the beginning has been the issue of prison slave labor. This is where the interests of prisoners and free world workers intersect at their most obvious. If people outside prison didn’t think criminal justice policies affected them, PLN would make prisons relevant by showing how prison slave labor took their jobs and undermined their wages. This coverage was helped by the fact that Washington was a national leader in the exploitation of prison slave labor by private businesses.

PLN has broken stories on how corporations like Boeing, Microsoft, Eddie Bauer, Planet Hollywood, Starbucks and Nintendo, plus U.S. congressman Jack Metcalf, have all used prison slave labor to advance their interests. These stories were picked up by other media, increasing PLN’s exposure. While PLN continues to be the leader in reporting on prison slavery, my own views on the subject have changed. Influenced by the writings of Bruce Western, I came to realize the big story wasn’t the 5,000 prisoners who work for private companies or the 60,000 who work for prison industries – and those only because of the massive government subsidies that prison industries receive – but the 2.3 million prisoners who have been removed from the U.S. labor market completely.

In June 1992, I was transferred back to WSR where Ed and I could collaborate on PLN in person for the first time since the magazine started. I had been infracted by Clallam Bay prison officials in 1991 for reporting in PLN the racist beatings of prisoners by gangs of white guards. Unable to generate attention for the beatings themselves, my punishment for reporting the attacks generated front-page news in the Seattle Times. Eventually the disciplinary charges were dropped, but not before I had spent a month in a control unit for reporting the abuses. The presses kept rolling.

PLN Becomes a Magazine

On PLN’s third anniversary in May 1993, we made the big leap. We switched to offset printing instead of photocopying, and permanently expanded our size to 16 pages. PLN was no longer a newsletter; we were now a magazine. PLN had 600 subscribers.

In October 1993, Ed was finally paroled after spending 18 years in prison. The state parole board, no doubt unhappy at PLN’s critical coverage of their activities, imposed a “no felon contact” order on Ed. This meant Ed could have no contact, by mail or phone, with me or any other felon. The parole board made it very clear that this was for the purpose of preventing Ed’s involvement with PLN. If Ed were involved in publishing PLN in any way, he would be thrown back in prison.

The ACLU of Washington filed suit on our behalf to challenge the rule as violating Ed’s right to free speech as well as my own. In an unpublished ruling, Judge Robert Bryan in Tacoma dismissed our lawsuit, holding that it was permissible for the state to imprison someone for publishing a magazine while they were on parole. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals would eventually dismiss our suit as moot when, after three years on state parole, Ed was finally discharged from the parole board’s custody. In the meantime, Ed had tired of PLN as he had with his previous publishing efforts, and got on with his life and moved to California. Washington state prisoner Dan Pens was PLN’s co-editor from 1994 to 2001.

PLN switched to an East coast printer that offered significant savings over Seattle printers. This allowed PLN to expand to 20 pages. Within the year PLN was no longer being mailed by volunteers; our printer did the mailing for us.

In January 1996, PLN hired its first staff person, Sandy Judd. PLN’s needs and circulation had grown to the point that volunteers were simply unable to do all the work that needed to be done. With some 1,600 subscribers, data entry, layout, accounting and other tasks required full-time attention. In 2001, former Washington prisoner Don Miniken became PLN’s executive director. Sandy also returned as PLN’s data manager and layout person, and PLN began its employment of work study students and local volunteers for office tasks. Hans Sherrer, a former prisoner and expert on wrongful convictions, became PLN’s circulation manager until October 2004, when he went to work full-time for Justice Denied, a magazine specializing in wrongful convictions.

Our May 2010 issue marks PLN’s 20-year anniversary and 244th issue of publishing. We now have around 7,000 subscribers in all 50 states.

PLN goes into every medium and maximum security prison in the U.S. and many of the minimum security facilities and jails as well. PLN’s subscribers include prisoners, judges, lawyers, journalists, academics, prison and jail officials, activists and concerned citizens.

The bulk of each issue of PLN is still written by prisoners and former prisoners. In 1999, the Washington DOC banned correspondence between prisoners. The resulting breakdown in communication made coordinating PLN difficult, to say the least, between myself and PLN’s imprisoned contributing writers.

Upon my release in 2003, I was able to do a lot more in the way of research and advocacy as PLN’s editor than I had while imprisoned. In 2005 we were able to hire Alex Friedmann as PLN’s associate editor. Alex had been imprisoned in Tennessee when he first began writing for PLN in 1996 as a volunteer contributing writer. Alex’s invaluable skills as a researcher and editor vastly improved the content of PLN and the depth and breadth of our coverage.

My first day out of prison illustrates the transition from prisoner editor to non-prisoner editor. I was picked up at the Monroe Correctional Complex at 8:30 AM on December 16, 2003 by Don Miniken and Hans Sherrer, PLN’s executive director and circulation manager, respectively. By 10:30 AM we were in PLN’s Seattle office and I was learning to use the Internet and e-mail, my first experience with both. At noon we had lunch with Jesse Wing and Carrie Wilkinson, part of the McDonald, Hogue and Bayless legal team that successfully represented PLN in PLN v. Lehman, a censorship suit against the Washington DOC. At 2:30 PM I was back in PLN’s office doing a television interview with Fox News on prison slave labor. It hasn’t stopped since.

We would also like to thank all those people who have served on our board as first Prisoners’ Legal News and now as the Human Rights Defense Center over the years. Our current and former directors are: Dan Axtell, Rick Best, Bell Chevigny, Scott Dionne, Judy Greene, Tara Herivel, Sandy Judd, Ed Mead, Janie Pulsifer, Sheila Rule, Ellen Spertus, Peter Sussman, Silja Talvi, Bill Trine, Josephine Wigginton and Rollin Wright.

Over the years we have had a number of contributing writers across the country who contribute articles and reporting to PLN. Our first contributing writer was James Quigley, then a Florida prisoner, who began writing for PLN in 1995. James killed himself in a Vermont prison control unit in 2003. Our other contributing writers have included, in no particular order: Willie Wisely, Alex Friedmann, Matt Clarke, Mark Wilson, Julia Lutsky, Daniel Burton-Rose, Ronald Young, Mark Cook, Dan Pens, Rick Card, Bob Williams, Mike Rigby, Roger Smith, Lonnie Burton, Rabih Aboul Hosn, Floyd Spruyte, Gary Hunter, Rex Bagley, Roger Hummel, David Reutter, Robert Woodman, Sam Rutherford, Jimmie Franks, Brandon Sample, Justin Miller, Derik Limberg, John Dannenberg, Mike Brodheim and others. Our quarterly columnists have included attorneys John Midgley, Walter Reaves, Kent Russell and Dan Manville, and political prisoners Laura Whitehorn, Linda Evans, Marilyn Buck and Mumia Abu-Jamal. Denise Johnston contributed a column on incarcerated parents. Michael Cohen contributes a medical column. For stories that have required investigative follow-up, PLN has been able to count on excellent investigative reporters like Ken Silverstein, Jennifer Vogel, Daniel Burton-Rose, Silja Talvi, Ian Urbina, Leah Caldwell, Mark Dow, Peter Wagner, Anne Marie Cusac, Beau Hodai, Terry Allen, Christian Parenti, Alan Prendergast, Greg Dober, Lance Tapley, Jim Ridgeway and Todd Matthews, among others. This has helped PLN provide a wider spectrum of voices and deeper and better coverage of criminal justice issues, and helped us expand in size while continuously improving our quality.

Then there is the design of the magazine itself. Since we went to computerized layout in 1991 the magazine has been designed and laid out by: Ed Mead, Judy Bass, Dan Axtell, Sandy Judd, Thomas Sellman, Don Miniken and Lance Scott. Our printers have been Consolidated Printing in Seattle, Prompt Press in Camden, New Jersey and Oregon Lithograph in McMinnville, Oregon.

In 1998 Common Courage Press published our first book, The Celling of America: An Inside Look at the U.S. Prison Industry. Edited by Daniel Burton-Rose, Dan Pens and myself, the book is a PLN anthology. Celling of America lays out in one place the reality and politics of the prison industrial complex in the mid 1990s. Now in its third printing, the book has received critical acclaim and helped boost PLN’s profile. Between 1998 and 2000, I did a weekly radio show on KPFA’s Flashpoints program called “This Week Behind Bars.” The show aired on Fridays and consisted of news reports from PLN about what was happening in American prisons and jails. Hans Sherrer, Alex Friedmann and I have done hundreds of radio interviews on PLN’s behalf advocating for the rights of prisoners. In addition, PLN is frequently quoted on prison issues by other publications.

In 2003, Routledge Press published Prison Nation: The Warehousing of America’s Poor, a book edited by attorney Tara Herivel and myself that made the connection between mass imprisonment and under-funded indigent defense systems. Now in its third printing and winner of the 2003 Gustavus Myers Outstanding Book award, it has been well received.

In 2008, the New Press published Prison Profiteers: Who Makes Money from Mass Incarceration. An anthology edited by Tara Herivel and myself, in this volume we set out to explore who benefits from the U.S. policies of mass imprisonment that make the U.S. the world’s leader in putting people in prison.

This trilogy of PLN anthologies, spanning a decade, does an impressive job of laying out the political landscape of the 1990s that cemented the most repressive policies of mass imprisonment, the conveyor-belt judiciary that ensures poor people accused of a crime are more likely to wind up in prison than their wealthy counterparts accused of crimes, and the economic and political beneficiaries of these policies and who is harmed by them.

The Prison Legal News website, www.prisonlegalnews.org, is now the largest prison and jail news site on the Internet, with all PLN back issues in PDF format as they appeared when published, a searchable database with over 22,000 articles and 10,000 court cases, and a publications library and brief bank. It is the premier prison news and litigation research site. Our website receives over 100,000 visitors a month and is frequently cited as a resource and source of information by journalists, lawyers and courts, among others.

In addition to our printed and online publications, PLN has provided an extensive source of advocacy in the media, legislatures and the courts. Alex Friedmann and I regularly speak on the topic of prisoners’ rights at conferences, conventions and law schools. We do dozens of media interviews a year and provide background information on prison and jail topics to journalists and producers. Alex has testified before the U.S. Congress and state legislatures on prison-related topics. We have submitted comments to public agencies including the Federal Communications Commission, the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission and the Civil Rights Commission.

PLN remains unique in many respects. First, PLN is the only independent, uncensored nationally-circulated magazine edited and produced largely by prisoners and ex-prisoners anywhere in the U.S., if not the world. It is also the longest lived in U.S. history. Second, PLN is one of the few publications that offers a class-based analysis of the criminal justice system. No other publication has the depth and breadth of coverage of detention facility litigation and news that PLN does.

For the past twenty years PLN has relied almost exclusively on donations sent by subscribers. In recent years, advertising income has helped offset PLN’s costs as well. In 1998 PLN began distributing books with the release of our first anthology, The Celling of America. Our book list has expanded as a way to both augment our public education mission and provide prisoners with the means to help themselves, and to help contribute to PLN’s continued existence. Until PLN had to hire a staff person we operated on a break-even basis. As late as 1995, we were giving away up to 48% of our subscriptions to prisoners who could not, or claimed they couldn’t, afford to subscribe. With the expense of a staff person we had to dramatically limit the number of free subscriptions. Over the years PLN has received generous support from the Open Society Institute, the Public Welfare Foundation, the Sonya Staff Foundation, the Art Appreciation Foundation, the Solidago Foundation, Resist, AFSCME, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Funding Exchange, all of which enabled PLN to grow and professionalize.

A free press doesn’t come cheap. Neither does free speech. From the very first issue to this day, PLN has been censored in prisons and jails across the country. In many cases we have been able to resolve censorship issues administratively. In cases where that was not possible, we filed suit and resolved the matter in court. The sidebar to this article gives a rundown on PLN’s extensive litigation history. Whether as a reflection of the times or a comment on PLN’s effectiveness, we are facing more attempts at censorship nationally than at any time in the past twenty years. PLN may well be the most censored publication in America.

PLN in the Next Decade

A question I have been asked is whether PLN is “successful.” Success is a relative term. When a French journalist asked Mao Tse-Tung in the 1960s if he thought the French Revolution in 1789 had been successful, Mao reportedly replied “It’s too soon to tell.” So too with PLN. The prison and jail population in the U.S. has more than doubled to well over 2.3 million people just in the time we have been publishing, and it continues to grow. By any objective standard, prison conditions, overcrowding and brutality are now far worse than at any time in the past 40 years. Draconian laws criminalize more behavior and impose harsher punishment in worse conditions of confinement than at any time in modern world history.

With 5 percent of the world’s population, the U.S. has 25% of the world’s prisoners. The legal rights of American prisoners are diminishing daily under coordinated attacks from conservative courts, yellow journalists and reactionary politicians. The corporate media and politicians alike thrive on a daily diet of sensationalized crime and prisoner bashing, while prisons and jails consume ever-increasing portions of the government budget to the detriment of everything else. The economic downturn has led some states to diminish their prison populations but nationally the number of prisoners continues to grow.

PLN has duly chronicled each spiral in this downward cycle of repression and violence. We have provided a critique and analysis of the growth of the prison industrial complex and have exposed the human rights abuses which are the daily reality of the American gulag at the beginning of this century. When some people purported to be shocked when the American torture chambers in Iraq were first exposed in the Abu Ghraib pictures, we could sadly point out that PLN had been reporting similar occurrences in American prisons since our inception in 1990, and still do. In that sense, I believe PLN has been successful. Even if we didn’t stop the evils of our time, at least we struggled against them and did the best we could under the circumstances. That we have managed to publish at all under these circumstances is a remarkable success. When I started PLN, I never thought I would be writing this retrospective twenty years later in the same magazine after being released from prison.

But not all is gloom and doom. PLN has helped stop some of the abuses that are legion in the American gulag. We have also borne witness to what is happening and duly documented it. Recent years have seen an increase in interest and support for prison issues and human rights in the United States. Many of PLN’s critiques of prison slave labor and other issues have been picked up and adopted by labor groups and even some elements of the corporate media. Our censorship litigation has helped secure the rights of prisoners and publishers alike in many states, and our public records litigation has helped to ensure government transparency.

I believe that ultimately PLN’s success will be measured by its usefulness to the prisoners, activists, journalists, attorneys and citizens who tried to make a difference for the better. We have tried our best to provide timely, accurate, helpful information that people can use in their daily struggle for justice. PLN also serves as a useful, contemporaneous account of prison issues for later historians.

The main obstacles that PLN faces are those faced by all alternative media in the U.S.: under-funding and the corresponding inability to reach more people with our message. Absent relatively (for PLN) large-scale funding from outside sources to do outreach work, this will continue to be a problem for the foreseeable future. The other primary problems facing PLN are prisoner illiteracy (depending on the state, between 40 to 70% of the prison population is functionally illiterate), and political apathy. Despite that situation, PLN has survived and steadily grown. The need that led to PLN’s creation has only increased.

Corporate media coverage of prison and criminal justice issues tends to be abysmal. Most media coverage is little more than press-release journalism. Input from prisoners or activists is rarely sought. Since its inception, PLN has ensured that the voices of class conscious prisoners are heard. We are proud of the fact that over the years many stories originally broken or developed by PLN have been picked up by other news sources, including the corporate media. We are heartened by the fact that prisoners in other states started similar publications to deal with their local issues. This includes Florida Prison Legal Perspectives, Southland News and Prison Information Network, among others.

After two decades of publishing it must be emphasized that PLN has always been very much a collective effort. PLN has had editors who bore the brunt of our captor’s displeasure for speaking truth to power, but the reality is that PLN would never have been possible if it were not for the many volunteers and supporters who have so generously donated their time, energy, skills, labor, advice and money. The cause of prisoner and human rights has never been very popular in this country. In today’s political climate it takes extraordinary courage and commitment to support a project like PLN.

The volunteers and employees, without whose support PLN would not exist today, include, in no particular order: Dan Axtell, Dan Tenenbaum, Rollin Wright, Zuraya Wright, Allan Parmelee, Judy Bass, Carrie Roth, Janie Pulsifer, Jim Smith, Jim McMahon, Scott Dione, Cathy Wiley, Ellen Spertus, Sandy Judd, Wesley Duran, the late Michael Misrok, Shannon Hall, the late Thomas Sellman, Linda Novenski, Jo Wigginton, Jennifer Umbehocker, Zina Antoskow, Martin and Rebecca Chaney, Bob Fischer, Latoya Anderson, Sue Hartman, Susan Schwartzkopf, Samual Schwartzkopf, Don Miniken, Mel Motel, Ryan Barnett, Sam Phillips, Sam Rutherford, Danielle Fuskerud, Christine McManich, Ron Podlaski, Zachary Phillips, Chris St. Pierre and many others.

The lawyers who have advised and represented PLN on matters as diverse as Internet law and censorship litigation over the years include, in no particular order: Bob Cumbow, Mickey Gendler, Bob Kaplan, Joe Bringman, Leonard Schroeter, Dan Manville, Rhonda Brownstein and the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Washington ACLU and the Oregon, Kansas, Colorado, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Kansas & Western Missouri, Arizona and Nevada ACLUs, Mac Scott, Darren Nitz, David Fathi and the ACLU National Prison Project, Lee Tien and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, J. Patrick Sullivan, Randy Berg, Peter Siegel, Cullin O’Brien, Jognwon Yi, Darrell Cochran, Bruce Plenk, Max Kautsch, Alison Howard, Andy Mar, David Bowman, Jesse Wing, Tim Ford, Carrie Wilkinson, Sandy Rosen, Janet Tung, Janet Stanton, Susan Seager, Bill Trine, Alison Hardy, Marc Blackman, Frank Cuthbertson, Mike Kipling, Brian Barnard, Peter Schmidt, David Bowman, Don Evans, Michelle Earl Hubbard, Frank Kriedler, Andy Clarke, Hank Balson, Sarah Duran, Ernest Galvan, Ken Walczak, Amy Whelan, Blake Thompson, Elizabeth Eng, Steven Bonney, Ed Elder, Mara Verheyden Hilliard, Carl Messineo, Radhika Miller, Jeff Fogel, Steve Rosenfield, Scott Medlock, Elizabeth Cummings, Mary Howell, Brian Spears, Gerry Weber, Robert McDuff, Dan Pachoda, Howard Friedman, David Milton, Mary Catherine Roper, Denny Wong, Ari Krichevner, Najeeb Khoury, Andy Foster, Alicia Hickok, Rick Coe, and Sam Stiltner. I apologize if I have left anyone off this list of exceptional and dedicated attorneys.

Ultimately, the people who have contributed articles, donated money and subscribed are those who have made PLN possible today. Without all of these contributions to PLN’s collective effort – and there are far too many to name here – we would have met the fate of the vast majority of alternative publications: we would have folded within a year. Instead, we have lasted two decades.

In 2009 we changed the name of our non-profit to the Human Rights Defense Center to better reflect our activities. This includes book publishing. We published our first book last year, The Prisoners’ Guerrilla Handbook to Correspondence Programs in the U.S. and Canada. Written by Missouri prisoner Jon Marc Taylor and edited by PLN staff member Susan Schwartzkopf, it reflects our desire to publish and distribute self-help, non-fiction reference books that prisoners can use to help themselves. Our next book, The Habeas Citebook, by federal prisoner Brandon Sample, is in production now. We also added a staff attorney position and hired Dan Manville as our first general counsel to represent PLN in censorship litigation and selected catastrophic injury cases around the country. Prison Legal News the magazine is published as an HRDC project.

In March 2010 we closed our Seattle office and moved all HRDC operations to Brattleboro, Vermont, where I have been based since I was released from prison in 2003. We did this to cut costs and improve efficiency by consolidating our employees and operations in one location. Don Miniken, our executive director since 2001, stepped down and I have assumed that position.

Continued advocacy on behalf of prisoners and their families on all fronts and ensuring the right of prisoners to receive PLN are all daily projects for us. Expanding PLN’s book distribution list, further increasing PLN’s size to bring readers more news and information, and expanding our circulation are all goals for the immediate future. Going into the next decade, 21st century PLN will still be here, giving voice to the voiceless and providing the best news and analysis on prison and jail-related issues around.

Spread the word.