MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Under Lock & Key is a news service written by and for prisoners with a focus on what is going on behind bars throughout the United States. Under Lock & Key is available to U.S. prisoners for free through MIM(Prisons)'s Free Political Literature to Prisoners Program, by writing:
MIM(Prisons) PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140.
I want to share with you and the other ULK readers the response
to the 602 petition I sent to the Secretary of CDCR, and to the
Ombudsman Sarah Malone. There was no response from the Ombudsman’s
office. But Matthew Cates forwarded my petition to Warden Paramo who in
turn delegated it down to Associate Warden Straton, who came to
interview me in person.
Associate Warden Straton did not make any excuses. He said, “You’re
absolutely right, the 602 appeals system is severely screwed up,
however, we just forced appeals coordinator Cobb to retire early, and we
replaced him with Mr. Olson who is approximately 6 to 8 weeks behind in
processing our 602s. Just try to be patient as we try to straighten this
mess out.”
I do believe Associate Warden Straton is being sincere, but only time
will tell for sure. I just had a family member file a citizen’s
complaint on my behalf, which all ULK readers should have their
family do because, by law the Warden must send a response to anyone who
files a citizen’s complaint, even if it’s just in the form of a letter.
My plan is to create a paper trail using the Form 22 as a verification
that I’ve placed my 602 appeals in the metal 602 box in my housing unit.
Then once the Warden sends my family his response I’ll have the proof I
need for court to show that he was made aware of the problem but failed
to correct it.
We did get 75 copies of the grievance petitions made, but the program
worker who was making them got busted on the second set and lost his
job. But 75 made it to Sacramento successfully.
Also I just wanted to thank you for that article in ULK about
us
SNYs being part of the greater whole. Just because we came to this
side doesn’t mean we’re not fighters for the greater good. In fact,
that’s one of the reasons I came to this side, to avoid the petty
politics and work towards better living conditions for all.
MIM(Prisons) adds: This comrade is making good use of the
California
grievance petition which addresses the mishandling of 602s
(grievances) in California prisons. Inspired by California, this
campaign has spread to many other states, with petitions now customized
for Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina,
Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon and Texas. We don’t expect big changes to come
from this petition; we know this is a battle for small reforms within a
fundamentally corrupt system. But the grievance system is the primary
way that prisoners can legally fight for their limited rights, and often
these rights are tied up with survival and freedom to organize and
educate others. We must defend these rights as a key tactical battle in
building the anti-imperialist movement within the criminal injustice
system.
I was glad to see petitions available concerning the grievance process
here in California. Please send me one of those in the self-addressed
stamped envelope I’ve enclosed. I’d also like to say a few words on the
grievance process here in California.
The main problem with the grievance process is at the informal level,
when a prisoner has to get two responses from staff on a CDCR 22 form.
Unless you’re challenging something out of the Title 15, the CDCR 22
must be filled out. That’s very hard to do, considering most staff just
throw them away. The CDCR 22 is designed so that officers can sign it at
the door, verifying that it was sent, and give the prisoner a receipt.
However, even with the receipt, if the prisoner does not have two staff
responses, the appeals coordinator will reject the grievance. The Title
15 Section 3084.3 (b), (c), and Section 3086 (e)(2) allow them to do
that.
What we should do is file a grievance on those three Title 15 sections I
just listed, requesting that they be changed to state: “One or two
signed CDCR 22 receipts requesting remedy or supporting documents that
also show that the staff member to whom the CDCR 22 was mailed did not
respond within the time limits detailed in Section 3086 (f)(4) and (h)
shall be receipted in lieu of requested supporting documents pursuant to
Section 3084.3.” The legal argument for this is the 14th Amendment
(access to courts) and Title 15 Section 3084.1 (right to appeal).
Just jump through the hoops until the grievance is exhausted. Then,
write the Prison Law Office and the ACLU and tell them you’d like their
help in filing a §1983 suit. Since it’s a major issue, a prisoner
advocate group will probably pick it up, and the petition distributed by
MIM(Prisons) could be used as evidence.
Another good grievance would challenge the Title 15 Section 3123 (b),
which gives CDCR the power to limit the law library hours to whatever it
wants. Here at Kern Valley State Prison, the law library is open 2 days
a week. The Title 15 should be amended to say: “Each law library shall
remain open five days a week, for not less than six hours per day.” The
14th Amendment should also be cited for that grievance.
MIM(Prisons) responds: CDCR Form 22 is a reform to the CDCR
grievance system that was rolled out December 2010 in response to the
campaign to End the High Desert State Prison Z-Unit Zoo.(1) Participants
of this campaign sent petitions to CDCR administrators and legal
protection groups such as the Prison Law Office and the U.S. Department
of Justice. An investigation was conducted, prisoners were interviewed,
and even some of their demands were met.(2)
But this contributor shows how our struggles for reforms, and even our
victories, will be met with more and more red tape under the current
power structure. Form 22 was supposedly designed “so that our requests
may be answered in a timely fashion by COs, with a receipt. Now we have
a clearer paper trail to use should K9s decide to implement their
underground rules.”(1) But still, there’s nothing stopping the COs from
simply throwing Form 22s away.
This contributor’s suggestion to change some of the language of Title 15
may be an improvement on the current grievance system in California. But
until COs and prison administrators acquire a proletarian morality that
values the well-being of all people, they will figure out ways
to continue to oppress those who they deem as unworthy of basic humyn
necessities, and their higher-ups will cover for them. This proletarian
morality doesn’t develop from procedural changes in prison operations,
no matter what documents we amend. Material conditions shape our
worldview, and until the material conditions that support national
oppression are abolished, the oppressors will continue to justify their
sick behaviors.
While we fight for reforms to improve our current conditions, we must
accept the necessity of total social change, namely the change from
capitalism to socialism. Until then there will always be a trade-off;
where one group gains, another loses. We must allow our own acquired
proletarian morality to infect our political work and inform the
orientation of all the battles we take on.
The campaign for proper handling of grievances, started in California,
keeps spreading! This time it touched down in Florida, where Under
Lock & Key is regularly censored across the board.
Mail the petition to your loved ones inside who are experiencing issues
with the grievance procedure. Send them extra copies to share! For more
info on this campaign, click
here.
Prisoners should send a copy of the signed petition to each of the
addresses below, which are also on the petition itself. Supporters
should send letters of support on behalf of prisoners.
Warden (specific to your facility)
Office of General Counsel, Secretary FDOC 501 S. Calhoun
St. Tallahassee, FL 32399-2500
Inspector General, FDOC 501 S. Calhoun St. Tallahassee, FL
32399-2500
Governor Rick Scott The Capitol Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division Special Litigation
Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, PHB, Washington, DC 20530
Office of Inspector General HOTLINE PO Box 9778 Arlington,
VA 22219
And send MIM(Prisons) copies of any responses you receive!
MIM(Prisons), USW PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140
Greetings. The struggle is long and arduous, and sometimes we do etch
out significant victories, as in the case of our brotha in In re
Crawford, 206 Cal.App.4th 1259 (2012).
It’s important to emphasize that this victory is a significant step in
reaffirming that prisoners are entitled to a measure of First Amendment
protection that cannot be ignored simply because the state dislikes the
spiel. New Afrikan prisoners have a right to identify with their
birthright if they so choose, as does anyone else for that matter –
Black, White or Brown. …
[California prison officials] have gone so far as to boldly proclaim
that the term New Afrikan was created by the Black Guerilla Family (BGF)
and that those who identify as or use the term are declaring their
allegiance to the BGF, which has been declared a prison gang. They have
sought to suppress its usage by validating (i.e. designating as a gang
member or associate) anyone who uses the term or who dares mention the
name George Jackson. …
Our brotha’s case In Re Crawford was filed June 4, 2012, and
certified for publication June 13. In a brilliant piece of judicial
reasoning, a panel of justices in a 3-0 decision finally reaffirmed a
prisoner’s First Amendment right to free speech and expression, stating:
Freedom of speech is first among the rights which form the foundation of
our free society. “The First Amendment embodies our choice as a nation
that, when it comes to such speech, the guiding principle is freedom –
the unfettered interchange of ideas – not whatever the State may view as
fair.” (Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett (2011) 131
S.Ct. 2806). “The protection given speech and press was fashioned to
assure unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of
political and social changes desired by the people … All ideas having
even the slightest redeeming social importance – unorthodox ideas,
controversial ideas, even ideas hateful to the prevailing climate of
opinion – have the full protection of the guaranties, unless excludable
because they encroach upon the limited area of more important
interests.” (Roth v. United States (1957) 354 U.S. 476, 484.”
The programs embodied in the New Afrikan Collective Think Tank, New
Afrikan Institute of Criminology 101, the George Jackson University and
the New Afrikan ideology itself are inclusive programs emphasizing a
solution-based approach to carnage in the poverty stricken slums from
where many of us come. The CDCR Prison Intelligence Units (PIU) have
sought to suppress these initiatives simply because they do not like the
message. They have marched into court after court with one standard
line: New Afrikan means BGF and these initiatives are promoting the BGF.
In re Crawford continues,
As recently noted by Chief Justice Roberts, “[t]he First Amendment
reflects ‘a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on
public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.’ [Citation.]
That is because ‘speech concerning public affairs is more than
self-expression; it is the essence of self-government.’ [Citation.] …
Speech on public issues occupies the highest rung of the hierarchy of
First Amendment values, and is entitled to special protection.”
(Snyder v. Phelps (2011) 562 U.S. , [131 S.Ct. 1207,
1215].
In re Crawford is a very important ruling because the justices
said these protections apply to prisoners as well. …
George Jackson cannot be removed from the fabric of the people’s
struggles in this society any more than Malcolm X can or Medger Evers or
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. or Harriett Tubman or Sojourner Truth or Ida
B. Wells, Rosa Parks or Frederick Douglass, or the countless others
who’ve fought and struggled for a brighter future for generations to
come.
What CDCR and its PIU are trying to do is make a run around the First
Amendment by shielding its suppression activity under the guise of
preventing gang activity, just as it’s done historically, which gave
rise to Procunier v. Martinez (1974) 416 U.S. 396, 413.
In In re Crawford, CDCR argued for an exception to the Martinez
test for validated gang members. The court declined to make such an
exception, holding: “Gang related correspondence is not within the
exception to the First Amendment test for censorship of outgoing inmate
mail.”
The fact that they even argued for such an exception shows their
mindset. Their intentions are to suppress that which they believe to be
repugnant, offensive and that which they believe a prisoner ought not be
thinking! In their minds we have no right to think or possess ideas,
concepts or vision beyond that which they believe we should possess.
Until In Re Crawford, these highly educated judges were
sanctioning this nonsense with twisted, perverted rulings permitting a
newspaper article or magazine layout or book to be used against a
prisoner for validation purposes [to put them in torture cells -
editor]. They issued twisted rulings like those in Ellis v.
Cambra or Hawkins v. Russell and In Re Furnace,
where the petitioner was told he has no right to his thoughts and the
First Amendment only protects a prisoner’s right to file a 602
[grievance form].
These kinds of fallacious rulings ought to be publicized so as to show
the skillful manipulation of the law by those sworn to uphold it. In
Re Crawford reestablishes that First Amendment protections apply to
prisoners and that we too enjoy a measure of free speech and expression.
We ought not be punished with fabricated notions of gang activity for
merely a thought!
However, if we are to continue to meet with success, we need our
professors, historians and intellectuals to step up and provide
declarations that we can use in our litigation, defending our right to
read, write and study all aspects of a people’s history, like Professor
James T. Campbell did in In Re Crawford. This is the only way a
prisoner can challenge the opinion of a prison official. …
Much work remains to be done, like stopping the bogus validations based
on legitimate First Amendment material. We know that many individuals
are falsely validated simply for reading George’s books or a newspaper
article, for observing Black August or for simply trying to get in touch
with one’s cultural identity.
These legitimate expressions should carry no penalty at all. You’re not
doing anything wrong, and a lot of brothas who’ve been validated simply
shouldn’t be. Nor should folks be frightened away from reading or
studying any aspect of history simply because the state doesn’t like its
content. Judges who issue fallacious opinions permitting prisoners to be
punished for reading a George Jackson book or researching your history
should be exposed.
Literary content and cultural and historical materials are not the
activities of a gang; they are political and social activities that we
have a right to express, according to the unanimous decision in In
re Crawford.
The First Amendment campaign continues to forge ahead, although we still
don’t have a lawyer. The campaign still exists, and we anticipate even
greater successes in the future. … We’ve cracked one layer of a thick
wall. Now all prisoners should take advantage of this brilliant ruling
and reassert your rights to study your heritage, Black, White or Brown.
MIM(Prisons) adds: The issue in this case was one that we have
experienced first-hand as well. For example, in 2008 a letter from a
comrade in California was censored before it could reach us because it
discussed the New Afrikan Collective, which allegedly was a code word
for the Black Guerrilla Family.(1) But in reality, the New Afrikan
Collective was a new political organization in New York focused on
bettering the conditions of New Afrikans as a nation, with no
connections to any sort of criminal activity.
The first thing that strikes us about this case is a quote from the
proceedings cited by the author above, “Gang related correspondence is
not within the exception to the First Amendment test for censorship of
outgoing inmate mail.” Unfortunately this is not part of the final
opinion explaining the decision of the court, and it is specific to
outgoing mail from the prison. Nonetheless, it would logically follow
from this statement that anything that can be connected to a gang is not
automatically dangerous or illegal.
“Gang members” have long been the boogeyman of post-integration white
Amerika. The pigs use “gang member” as a codeword to excuse the abuse
and denial of constitutional rights to oppressed nation youth,
particularly New Afrikan men. And this has been institutionalized in
more recent years with “gang enhancements,” “gang injunctions” and
“security threat group” labels that punish people for belonging to
lumpen organizations. Often our mail is censored because it mentions the
name of a lumpen organization in the context of a peace initiative or
organizing for prisoners’ humyn rights. While criminal activity is
deemed deserving more punishment with the gang label, non-criminal
activity is deemed criminal as well.
As the author discusses, it becomes a question of controlling ideas to
the extreme, where certain words are not permitted to be spoken or
written and certain symbols and colors cannot be displayed. So the quote
from the court above is just a baby step in the direction of applying
the First Amendment rights of association and expression to oppressed
nation youth. Those who are legally inclined should consider how this
issue can be pushed further in future battles. Not only is such work
important in restoring rights to people, but we can create space for
these organizations to build in more positive directions.
Part of this criminalization of a specific sector of society is the use
of self-created and perpetuated so-called experts on gang intelligence.
Most of our readers are all too familiar with this farce of a profession
that is acutely exposed by the court’s opinion in this case. The final
court opinion calls out CO J. Silveira for claiming that the plaintiff’s
letter contained an intricate code when he could provide no evidence
that this was true. They also call him out for using his “training and
experience” as the basis for all his arguments.
The warden’s argument is flawed for two reasons. First, the argument is
based solely on the unsupported assertions and speculative conclusions
in Silveira’s declaration. The declaration is incompetent as evidence
because it contains no factual allegations supporting those assertions
and conclusions. Second, even if the declaration could properly be
considered, it does not establish that the letter posed a threat to
prison security.
As great as this is, as the author of the article above points out, they
usually get away with such baseless claims. More well thought out
lawsuits like this are needed, because more favorable case law is
needed. But neither alone represents any real victory in a system that
exists to maintain the existing social hierarchy. These are just pieces
of a long, patient struggle that has been ongoing for generations. The
people must exercise the rights won here to make them real. We must
popularize and contextualize the nature of this struggle.
I am enclosing the response I received from the assistant warden at
Southeast Correctional Center (SECC) for the censorship petition I sent
to Tom Clements. The policy quoted is Missouri’s censorship policy (IS
13-1.2).
Prisoners are constantly being denied due process right here, when the
oppressor enforces a punishment called “limited property.” We are put on
limited property immediately based on an officer’s words, with no
hearing or anything.
It is so hard for the captives here to even attain an informal
resolution request that we must file before going to the grievance
process. They are just doing whatever they want, not following policy.
I wrote the Assistant Warden a kite to inform him of the difficulties in
the grievance procedure in Ad-Seg, and the Functional Unit Manager
intercepted it and responded herself. The message I received from that
is that the only correspondence that will reach its destination from her
house are those that she approves of. A violation of my First Amendment
rights in the U.S. Constitution.
Offenses of assault and sexual harassment occur daily in Ad-Seg here.
The Warden (Ian Wallace) removed the strip cages from the housing unit.
Now prisoners are stripped of their clothes off camera by COs while
captives are still bound by mechanical wrist restraints. They can do
anything they want to us off camera; assault us, free case us, and if we
write a complaint the officers will refute it and the response we will
receive is that we have provided no evidence of the allegations.
If there is a grievance petition already for the prisoners in Missouri,
please send a copy so I could circulate it here, because they’re not
being responded to fairly and justly. Looking forward to the upcoming
issue of Under Lock & Key.
MIM(Prisons) responds: The current campaign in Missouri is based
around the
Petition
Against Violations of the Constitution focusing on censorship, and
including the failure to respond to grievances. We are always working
with local USW comrades to improve ongoing campaigns and petitions. So
feel free to draft up new petitions or proposals and send them in for
consideration.
In many cases the lack of meaningful grievance procedure may trump
censorship battles if censorship appeals are being ignored. At the same
time, if we hope to see any incremental improvements in conditions we
should focus our energies on specific demands that are both winnable and
popular among the masses of prisoners.
I would like to bring something to your attention that’s going on here
at Union Correctional Institution with staff attacks and starvation
tactics. In April I was assaulted by prison staff. Upon grieving the
issue at the institutional level, I was immediately retaliated against,
choked with security waist chains, placed on strip status butt naked,
property taken and destroyed, and placed back into cold cell 40/50
degrees with AC blowing for nine days straight without clothes. I had no
sheets, no comfort items, no property, no toothpaste, no toilet tissue,
no socks, no mattress, no nothing, just sleeping on a concrete bunk.
I was set up with all kinds of weapons, income tax forms, gang letters,
bogus urine test, etc. These staff are out of control. I’m constantly
being verbally threatened after I have already been assaulted. Security
staff have orderlies empty food trays and pour chemicals and spit in the
food after they starve us for 7 or 8 days straight, knowing prisoners
will eat anything after not being fed for that long. Medical staff here
are covering up for these attacks.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This story of prison staff abuse and
retaliation against those who file grievances is unfortunately very
common in prisons across the country. The campaign to
demand
grievances be addressed is spreading to new states quickly as
comrades look for ways to fight back against this repression. We don’t
yet have a petition for the state of Florida so we need someone from
that state to look up citations and policies specific to Florida for
reference in the petition. If you do this research and send us what
needs to be rewritten for your particular state, we will gladly send an
edited, accurate copy to other USW and Legal Clinic folks in your state.
by a North Carolina prisoner August 2012 permalink
I have been a reader of your publication going on a couple years now,
and I find it the most uplifting and informative I’ve seen yet! Also,
the comrades in this movement have been most helpful in demonstrating to
us how to file a petition against the grievance process here in North
Carolina prisons. I am currently housed at Marion Correctional
Institution’s segregation unit in Marion, North Carolina where they keep
any prisoner who dares to challenge and question their conduct or
actions. However, I have witnessed over the years how our grievance
process has become so watered down to the point when you ask for the
DC-410 form you’re laughed at by correctional officers and told to spell
their names right (ha ha ha). It has become no more than a venting
process for us! There is no consideration that this is a
constitutionally protected right.
However, I recently have sent copies of my petition to the Justice
Department in Atlanta, Georgia and the Inspector General’s office in
Virginia, as well as two copies to North Carolina Department of Public
Safety (NC DPS) Secretary Jennie Lancaster via certified mail. I haven’t
even gotten acknowledgements that they received any of them. So you see,
we’re being stifled, even at the highest levels. Therefore, we won’t get
anything done on this issue, short of court action. The people who are
supposed to protect our rights won’t even do so. So we regroup, and
continue this fight for justice, so as to stop this “rubber stamping”
game with our rights.
MIM(Prisons) responds: It seems other prisoners in North Carolina
have already come to similar conclusions, as comrades recently passed
the two week mark on a hunger strike demanding improvements in
conditions, including an end to long-term isolation.
On Monday July 16th, prisoners began hunger strikes at Bertie CI in
Windsor, Scotland CI in Laurinburg, and Central Prison in Raleigh.
Targeting a wide range of conditions related but not exclusive to
solitary confinement, the prisoners have vowed not to eat until their
demands are met.(1)
Check this link below for the
full
list of demands, because apparently the list released by the NC DPS
had sections redacted for “security issues.”(2) Which might explain why
the mainstream media is not reporting the more serious demands, such as
“An immediate end to the physical and mental abuse inflicted by
officers”, “The end of cell restriction. Sometimes prisoners are locked
in their cell for weeks or more than a month, unable to come out for
showers and recreation” and “An immediate stop to officers’ tampering or
throwing away prisoners’ mail.”(1)
We’ve seen the increased activity in North Carolina over the last couple
years, and so has the DPS, who have stepped up a campaign to keep
Under Lock & Key and other mail from MIM(Prisons), out of
the hands of their prisoners. Below is one image that triggered
censorship in the last issue of ULK.
The NC Publication Review Committee ironically cited this image when
they censored ULK26 for “Violence against any ethnic, racial or
religious group”
Just as this comrade has been pushing every administrative avenue to get
prisoners’ rights respected, MIM(Prisons) has been doing the same to
fight this rampant censorship and ignoring of grievances. As this
comrade says, we continue to regroup and do everything we can to stop
these injustices. We encourage the comrades in North Carolina to keep
speaking up, as your rights are not guaranteed; you must stand up and
demand them.
Based on a suggestion from a USW comrade in California, we have
reformatted all the petitions for the grievance petition campaign. The
new format makes it easy for prisoners to persynalize each petition, and
to provide clear examples of the experiences they’ve had with the broken
grievance system in their state. These are details some prison
administrators have asked for in their responses to the petitions
they’ve received.
We also incorporated all addresses for who should receive copies of the
petition right onto the petition itself. This way people don’t have to
worry about keeping track of two pieces of paper (one with the address,
and one with their signature).
Besides these significant changes in the quality of information the
petitions now provide, the campaign has spread a lot in recent months.
New petitions have been created for
Montana,
Oregon,
and
Nevada,
to add to the already active states of
Arizona,
California,
Colorado,
North
Carolina,
Oklahoma,
and
Texas.
The petitions can be downloaded and printed by people on the outside by
clicking on each state’s name above. You should send the petition to
your prisoner contacts (with extra copies if you can!) who are having
their voices and complaints quashed by prison authorities. The ability
to have grievances addressed has a direct impact on the day-to-day
living conditions of prisoners, can help to hold prison authorities
accountable for their actions, and even affects one’s ability to take an
issue to court if necessary.
by MIM(Prisons) July 2012 permalink
Click to download PDF of Nevada grievance petition
Mail the petition to your loved ones and comrades inside who are
experiencing issues with the grievance procedure. Send them extra copies
to share! For more info on this campaign, click
here.
Prisoners should send a copy of the signed petition to each of the
addresses below. Supporters should send letters of support on behalf of
prisoners.
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division Special Litigation
Section 950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, PHB Washington DC 20530
Office of Inspector General HOTLINE PO Box 9778 Arlington, VA
22219
And send MIM(Prisons) copies of any responses you receive!
MIM(Prisons), USW PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140
by MIM(Prisons) July 2012 permalink
Click to download a PDF of the Montana grievance petition
Mail the petition to your loved ones and comrades inside who are
experiencing issues with the grievance procedure. Send them extra copies
to share! For more info on this campaign, click
here.
Prisoners should send a copy of the signed petition to each of the
addresses below. Supporters should send letters of support on behalf of
prisoners.
ACLU of Montana PO Box 1317 Helena MT 59624
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division Special Litigation
Section 950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, PHB Washington DC 20530
Office of Inspector General HOTLINE PO Box 9778 Arlington, VA
22219
And send MIM(Prisons) copies of any responses you receive!
MIM(Prisons), USW PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140
