MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
ATTN: DAI Director
Department of Corrections
2729 Plaza Drive
P.O. Box 236
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Incorrectly Censored Publication
To Whom It May Concern:
We are the publishers of Under Lock & Key (ULK). We recently received a report from one XXXXXX Al-Hakeem XXXXXX #XXXXXX residing at the South Central Correctional Center that ULK issue #85 was not delivered to him because it is a “paid subscription.” There are three points we would like to address here.
First, upon reviewing MO-DOC Policy IS13-1.1 Offender Mail Procedures, we found that there is no policy specifically prohibiting the delivery of mail which is paid for by prisoners. The only regulations in place are for purchases on credit or requiring payment on delivery, which is not applicable here.
Secondly, ULK is not a paid subscription, so no such policy would be relevant in any case. Seeing as we are the publishers of ULK, we hope you will not try to dispute this statement.
Thirdly, it is patently illegal and blatantly unconstitutional for you to not notify us, as the publishers of censored material, when said material is censored by your institutions. As established by decades of case law regarding this issue, this is a violation of our due process rights as publishers and distributors of literary materials. Please refer to Montcalm Publishing Corporation v. Beck, 80 F.3d 105 (4th Cir. 1996). Furthermore, we would remind you that as the publisher, we have a First Amendment right to correspond with prisoners, including through publications such as Under Lock & Key. See Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401, 407-08 (1989).
Taken together, these three points illustrate a total lack of regard for the constitutional rights of both Mr. XXXXXX and ourselves. It is a complete failure of the institutional safeguards put in place to prevent abuses of power such as this when your employees in charge of censorship decisions can lie not only about the institutional policies regarding mail censorship but also about basic facts regarding our publication.
We request the decision to withhold ULK 85 be vacated and the publication be forwarded to Mr. XXXXXX. Failing to do this, we request that you send us adequate notice of the censorship as you are required to provide by law. Failure to provide appropriate notice and adherence to your policies may result in legal action.
Please govern yourself accordingly.
Sincerely,
09/05/2024
Acting Director advises SCCC this is not their policy
Show Text
...This will be reviewed with South Central Correctional Center as this is not one of our reasons utilized for censorship.
MIM Distributors appeals censorship to Deputy Director
Show Text
DAI Deputy Director
Department of Corrections
2729 Plaza Drive
Jefferson City, MO 65109
16 June 2014
RE: Censorship of Under Lock & Key Issue 37
Dear Mr. Dormire,
Warden Troy Steele recently sent a notice to MIM Distributors notifying us of the censorship of Under Lock & Key No. 37 at Potosi Correctional Center. He did not specify what contents triggered this censorship, except to state that he felt it could ?be used to instill violence or hatred among? prisoners. I am requesting an independent review of this decision.
I hope you also received my recent letter regarding the difficulties we've been having in getting staff at some facilities to abide by the review decisions made by your office to allow certain issues of Under Lock & Key to be delivered to Missouri prisoners.
MIM Distributors appeals censorship to Deputy Director
Show Text
DAI Deputy Director
Department of Corrections
2729 Plaza Drive
Jefferson City, MO 65109
16 June 2014
RE: Censorship of Under Lock & Key Issue 37
Dear Mr. Dormire,
Warden Troy Steele recently sent a notice to MIM Distributors notifying us of the censorship of Under Lock & Key No. 37 at Potosi Correctional Center. He did not specify what contents triggered this censorship, except to state that he felt it could ?be used to instill violence or hatred among? prisoners. I am requesting an independent review of this decision.
I hope you also received my recent letter regarding the difficulties we've been having in getting staff at some facilities to abide by the review decisions made by your office to allow certain issues of Under Lock & Key to be delivered to Missouri prisoners.
Thank you,
01/08/2015
Prisoner still has not received approved publication
Promotes, incites, or advocates violence, disorder or the violation of state or federal law, or advocates, facilitates or otherwise presents a risk of lawlessness, violence, anarchy or rebellion against a governmental authority. [Download Documentation]This was overturned
DAI Deputy Director
Department of Corrections
2729 Plaza Drive
Jefferson City, MO 65109
12 March 2013
RE: Statewide Censorship of Under Lock & Key Issue 30
Dear Sir/Madam,
We have received many notices, from multiple institutions in the Missouri DOC that state that Under Lock & Key, Jan/Feb, Issue #30 has been censored by the department. This letter is to request an independent review of this decision.
The reason stated is "IS13-1.2 Censorship Procedure III C-2 a.," which refers to "promotes, incites or advocates violence, disorder or the violation of state or federal law, or advocates, facilitates or otherwise presents a risk of lawlessness?" Under Lock & Key is very explicit in discouraging prisoners from using violence or from violating the law. The notification cites pages 1 and 9 of the newsletter. While there is a reference to violence on both pages, neither could be construed to be encouraging or promoting violence.
The first page contains a review of a book on economics and an article about the shooting that occurred in Newtown, CT. The artwork for the latter does depict Uncle Sam firing a gun, but this was a critique of the use of violence in this country and clearly not encouraging prisoners to follow suit.
Page 9 contains portions of an article about segregation in schools, which has no mention of violence or lawbreaking, not to mention advocating it. This page also contains the beginnings of an article on censorship, coincidentally, that compares statements about violence made by the founding fathers to materials that were deemed "dangerous" by the Wisconsin DOC. Perhaps the reviewer in Missouri wanted to prove the writer incorrect that these statements by the founding fathers would not be censored by prison employees. But they were put forth to prove a point in a legal argument, which is the type of arguments ULK consistently promotes, not as a means to make any argument for violence as is evident by reading the article.
It seems the reviewer mistakenly saw mentions of violence as promoting it, rather than reading the articles to see that they both served as a critique. I hope you agree and allow the prisoners held throughout Missouri to receive their copies of Under Lock & Key Issue 30. Thank you for taking the time to review this matter.
"...facilitates or otherwise presens a risk of lawlessness, violence, anarchy or rebellion against governmental authority..." [Download Documentation]This was overturned
Promotes, incites, or advocates violence, disorder or the violation of state or federal law, or advocates, facilitates or otherwise presents a risk of lawlessness, violence, anarchy or rebellion against a governmental authority. [Download Documentation]This was overturned
DAI Deputy Director
Department of Corrections
2729 Plaza Drive
Jefferson City, MO 65109
12 March 2013
RE: Statewide Censorship of Under Lock & Key Issue 30
Dear Sir/Madam,
We have received many notices, from multiple institutions in the Missouri DOC that state that Under Lock & Key, Jan/Feb, Issue #30 has been censored by the department. This letter is to request an independent review of this decision.
The reason stated is "IS13-1.2 Censorship Procedure III C-2 a.," which refers to "promotes, incites or advocates violence, disorder or the violation of state or federal law, or advocates, facilitates or otherwise presents a risk of lawlessness?" Under Lock & Key is very explicit in discouraging prisoners from using violence or from violating the law. The notification cites pages 1 and 9 of the newsletter. While there is a reference to violence on both pages, neither could be construed to be encouraging or promoting violence.
The first page contains a review of a book on economics and an article about the shooting that occurred in Newtown, CT. The artwork for the latter does depict Uncle Sam firing a gun, but this was a critique of the use of violence in this country and clearly not encouraging prisoners to follow suit.
Page 9 contains portions of an article about segregation in schools, which has no mention of violence or lawbreaking, not to mention advocating it. This page also contains the beginnings of an article on censorship, coincidentally, that compares statements about violence made by the founding fathers to materials that were deemed "dangerous" by the Wisconsin DOC. Perhaps the reviewer in Missouri wanted to prove the writer incorrect that these statements by the founding fathers would not be censored by prison employees. But they were put forth to prove a point in a legal argument, which is the type of arguments ULK consistently promotes, not as a means to make any argument for violence as is evident by reading the article.
It seems the reviewer mistakenly saw mentions of violence as promoting it, rather than reading the articles to see that they both served as a critique. I hope you agree and allow the prisoners held throughout Missouri to receive their copies of Under Lock & Key Issue 30. Thank you for taking the time to review this matter.
Promotes, incides, or advocates violence, disorder or the violation of state or federal law, or advocates, facilitates or otherwise presents a risk of lawlessness, violence, anarchy or rebellion against a governmental authority.[Download Documentation]
DAI Deputy Director
Department of Corrections
2729 Plaza Drive
Jefferson City, MO 65109
12 March 2013
RE: Statewide Censorship of Under Lock & Key Issue 30
Dear Sir/Madam,
We have received many notices, from multiple institutions in the Missouri DOC that state that Under Lock & Key, Jan/Feb, Issue #30 has been censored by the department. This letter is to request an independent review of this decision.
The reason stated is "IS13-1.2 Censorship Procedure III C-2 a.," which refers to "promotes, incites or advocates violence, disorder or the violation of state or federal law, or advocates, facilitates or otherwise presents a risk of lawlessness?" Under Lock & Key is very explicit in discouraging prisoners from using violence or from violating the law. The notification cites pages 1 and 9 of the newsletter. While there is a reference to violence on both pages, neither could be construed to be encouraging or promoting violence.
The first page contains a review of a book on economics and an article about the shooting that occurred in Newtown, CT. The artwork for the latter does depict Uncle Sam firing a gun, but this was a critique of the use of violence in this country and clearly not encouraging prisoners to follow suit.
Page 9 contains portions of an article about segregation in schools, which has no mention of violence or lawbreaking, not to mention advocating it. This page also contains the beginnings of an article on censorship, coincidentally, that compares statements about violence made by the founding fathers to materials that were deemed "dangerous" by the Wisconsin DOC. Perhaps the reviewer in Missouri wanted to prove the writer incorrect that these statements by the founding fathers would not be censored by prison employees. But they were put forth to prove a point in a legal argument, which is the type of arguments ULK consistently promotes, not as a means to make any argument for violence as is evident by reading the article.
It seems the reviewer mistakenly saw mentions of violence as promoting it, rather than reading the articles to see that they both served as a critique. I hope you agree and allow the prisoners held throughout Missouri to receive their copies of Under Lock & Key Issue 30. Thank you for taking the time to review this matter.
Michael Bowersox, Warden
South Central Correctional Center
255 W. Hwy 32
Licking, Mo. 65542
15 December 2008
Warden Bowersox,
This letter is regarding censorship of mail from MIM Distributors to Mr. XXXXXX XXXXXX (123455) that we were just made aware of. No notification was ever sent to us by the mailroom regarding this censorship, nor were the materials returned to us.
The reason given for censorship was: ?promotes, violence, disorder or the violation of state or federal law.? The pages cited in MIM Theory for censorship include articles on sex, history and MIM?s operational guidelines. None of these articles even deal with questions of violence or violating the law.
If you read page Under Lock & Key, you will see the box in every issue that states, ?Our current battles in the united states are legal ones. We encourage prisoners to join these battles while explicitly discouraging them from engaging in any violence or illegal acts.? So in fact, MIM literature is exactly the opposite of what is being claimed.
Therefore, I am requesting that the decision be reviewed and the literature be given to Mr. XXXXXX.
Michael Bowersox, Warden
South Central Correctional Center
255 W. Hwy 32
Licking, Mo. 65542
15 December 2008
Warden Bowersox,
This letter is regarding censorship of mail from MIM Distributors to Mr. XXXXXX XXXXXX (123456) that we were just made aware of. No notification was ever sent to us by the mailroom regarding this censorship, nor were the materials returned to us.
The reason given for censorship was: ?promotes, violence, disorder or the violation of state or federal law.? The pages cited in MIM Theory for censorship include articles on sex, history and MIM?s operational guidelines. None of these articles even deal with questions of violence or violating the law.
If you read page Under Lock & Key, you will see the box in every issue that states, ?Our current battles in the united states are legal ones. We encourage prisoners to join these battles while explicitly discouraging them from engaging in any violence or illegal acts.? So in fact, MIM literature is exactly the opposite of what is being claimed.
Therefore, I am requesting that the decision be reviewed and the literature be given to Mr. XXXXXX.
![[Download Documentation]](https://www.prisoncensorship.info/docs/c3866.jpg){kind=link}
![[Download Documentation]](https://www.prisoncensorship.info/docs/c1500.jpg){kind=link}
![[Download Documentation]](https://www.prisoncensorship.info/docs/c173.jpg){kind=link}
