Pennsylvania Department of Corrections Blocks
Prison Radio from Sharing Copies with Other Inmates
Prison Radio from Sharing Copies with Other Inmates
“There
is no iron curtain drawn between the Constitution and the prisons of
this country.” Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 555–56 (1974). Justice
White
By Noelle Harrahan
Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections has adopted collective punishment as the
“solution” for problems of violence inside its prisons.
News from inside is that collective punishment is being rolled out across the state. Under the guise of their new “Violence Reduction Initiative”, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (PA DOC) has begun punishing all inmates “associated” or on the same tier if there is a fight or someone is accused of a violent act. K. Brittian, Facility manager at SCI Frackville, responded to inmate Bryant Arroyo’s grievance by stating that “Facility Manager/Designees [are authorized to] ...utilize lock downs as a response to critical incidents…disorder, a threat to security or an inability to maintain orderly control of inmates." This reason for denying Bryant’s grievance misses the point, as it waves “security” as a red flag to obscure the unconstitutional action of punishing someone for something they did not do. This is not the “some” evidence standard, this is the NO EVIDENCE standard. Furthermore, the sanctions go far beyond reimposing order and locking folks down. The sanctions specifically target innocent individuals, continue far beyond the lock down, and escalate tensions with no due process and no grievance appeals allowed. Mail and visits are rights that involve access to the courts and additional constitutional protections.
Following any violent incident, any inmate or many inmates (who often have little knowledge of the incident in question) can lose phone calls, basic (necessary) commissary, recreation and yard time, access to the law library, mail, work, and more.
Collective punishment is immoral. It is unconstitutional and dangerous and it does not work. It is a tool in a repressive regime to get compliance. It is inhumane and brutal.
As a fascist stick in the prison guards’ toolkit, it offers the guards and prison officials unlimited and unaccountable latitude for selective enforcement and the targeting of specific prisoners.
The policing industry is endorsing this program, which means we will soon see this not just where it’s already started in Washington, Maryland, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania, but all across the nation—if we don’t respond.
If someone on Bryant Arroyo’s or Mumia Abu-Jamal’s tier throws a punch, their whole tier can be locked down. Well this recently happened and, ironically, the guys who threw the punch were given a semblance of “due process”: they could grieve their two days "in the hole". But Mumia and Bryant could not. They were not allowed to challenge the “collective punishment” given to the whole block. This threat looms over every person in these prisons, every day.
History has proven that jailhouse lawyers, community leaders, and the folk that are outspoken and organized are often the targets of prison officials.
Our correspondents are the most vulnerable in the face of these repressive policies. Prison Radio correspondent Bryant Arroyo shares with us what it is like to live in these conditions:
“Every day I’m in a state of impending lock down. We’re anxious all the time. The mood is very tense and it’s become dangerous for both inmates and staff alike.. ..It’s gotten to the point where if you see a fight might be about to break out, you grab your towel and head to the shower because you don’t know when your next chance will be.”
His room had been turned upside down by guards during the last lock down, as result of a fight he wasn’t even aware of.
As we have come to expect, these same brave men and women in prison are taking the lead in exposing these unconstitutional practices.
In addition to talking to us and organizing inside their tiers, Mumia Abu-Jamal and Bryant Arroyo have both filed inmate grievances. Mumia’s came after he was subjected to a lock down for events of which he had no knowledge, whatsoever. He argued that collective punishment is unconstitutional by its “inherent nature” as a violation of both the 8th and 14th amendments. From the letter: “Collective punishment is anathema to US law, as it is a government process that punishes others who have not participated in the event giving rise to said government action. PA DOC cannot institute a policy based on an unconstitutional theory or practice. Period.”
"The [Eighth] Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." Chief Justice Earl Warren Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958)
“The relief requested is to grant my legitimate grievance by abolishing this dysfunctional, collectively punitive, officially oppressive, unconstitutional policy which directly affected the ‘actually-innocent’ inmates by broadly and arbitrarily/capriciously misapplying the policy to everyone.” —Bryant Arroyo, Prison Radio correspondent at SCI Frackville PA.
Additionally, when Prison Radio sent copies of the grievances to other inmates filing complaints the prison censors rejected the mail. They indicated that the paper copy of the grievance was a prisoner’s “personal property” and could not be shared. This information needs to be widely distributed so these decisions can be immediately and effectively appealed. We filed a grievance on the blocking of legal documents being copied and sent to other inmates.
We can and must support folks inside when they are standing up for their rights.
News from inside is that collective punishment is being rolled out across the state. Under the guise of their new “Violence Reduction Initiative”, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (PA DOC) has begun punishing all inmates “associated” or on the same tier if there is a fight or someone is accused of a violent act. K. Brittian, Facility manager at SCI Frackville, responded to inmate Bryant Arroyo’s grievance by stating that “Facility Manager/Designees [are authorized to] ...utilize lock downs as a response to critical incidents…disorder, a threat to security or an inability to maintain orderly control of inmates." This reason for denying Bryant’s grievance misses the point, as it waves “security” as a red flag to obscure the unconstitutional action of punishing someone for something they did not do. This is not the “some” evidence standard, this is the NO EVIDENCE standard. Furthermore, the sanctions go far beyond reimposing order and locking folks down. The sanctions specifically target innocent individuals, continue far beyond the lock down, and escalate tensions with no due process and no grievance appeals allowed. Mail and visits are rights that involve access to the courts and additional constitutional protections.
Following any violent incident, any inmate or many inmates (who often have little knowledge of the incident in question) can lose phone calls, basic (necessary) commissary, recreation and yard time, access to the law library, mail, work, and more.
Collective punishment is immoral. It is unconstitutional and dangerous and it does not work. It is a tool in a repressive regime to get compliance. It is inhumane and brutal.
As a fascist stick in the prison guards’ toolkit, it offers the guards and prison officials unlimited and unaccountable latitude for selective enforcement and the targeting of specific prisoners.
The policing industry is endorsing this program, which means we will soon see this not just where it’s already started in Washington, Maryland, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania, but all across the nation—if we don’t respond.
If someone on Bryant Arroyo’s or Mumia Abu-Jamal’s tier throws a punch, their whole tier can be locked down. Well this recently happened and, ironically, the guys who threw the punch were given a semblance of “due process”: they could grieve their two days "in the hole". But Mumia and Bryant could not. They were not allowed to challenge the “collective punishment” given to the whole block. This threat looms over every person in these prisons, every day.
History has proven that jailhouse lawyers, community leaders, and the folk that are outspoken and organized are often the targets of prison officials.
Our correspondents are the most vulnerable in the face of these repressive policies. Prison Radio correspondent Bryant Arroyo shares with us what it is like to live in these conditions:
“Every day I’m in a state of impending lock down. We’re anxious all the time. The mood is very tense and it’s become dangerous for both inmates and staff alike.. ..It’s gotten to the point where if you see a fight might be about to break out, you grab your towel and head to the shower because you don’t know when your next chance will be.”
His room had been turned upside down by guards during the last lock down, as result of a fight he wasn’t even aware of.
As we have come to expect, these same brave men and women in prison are taking the lead in exposing these unconstitutional practices.
In addition to talking to us and organizing inside their tiers, Mumia Abu-Jamal and Bryant Arroyo have both filed inmate grievances. Mumia’s came after he was subjected to a lock down for events of which he had no knowledge, whatsoever. He argued that collective punishment is unconstitutional by its “inherent nature” as a violation of both the 8th and 14th amendments. From the letter: “Collective punishment is anathema to US law, as it is a government process that punishes others who have not participated in the event giving rise to said government action. PA DOC cannot institute a policy based on an unconstitutional theory or practice. Period.”
"The [Eighth] Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." Chief Justice Earl Warren Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958)
“The relief requested is to grant my legitimate grievance by abolishing this dysfunctional, collectively punitive, officially oppressive, unconstitutional policy which directly affected the ‘actually-innocent’ inmates by broadly and arbitrarily/capriciously misapplying the policy to everyone.” —Bryant Arroyo, Prison Radio correspondent at SCI Frackville PA.
Additionally, when Prison Radio sent copies of the grievances to other inmates filing complaints the prison censors rejected the mail. They indicated that the paper copy of the grievance was a prisoner’s “personal property” and could not be shared. This information needs to be widely distributed so these decisions can be immediately and effectively appealed. We filed a grievance on the blocking of legal documents being copied and sent to other inmates.
We can and must support folks inside when they are standing up for their rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment