Under Lock & Key

As you are probably aware, Pelican Bay State Prison(PBSP) prisoners [and thousands of others across the state – editor] have resumed its Hunger Strike, due to the California Department of Corrections’ (CDC) stopping negotiations around its validation process and long-term isolation. My actions, and participation in these actions are of great importance to me, not only because it’s a just cause but because it exposes the CDC’s long standing practices which strip us prisoners of constitutional rights. I am also fighting this in the Northern District Court.

I participated in the July 1st hunger strike, and was one of the 17 prisoners who were tortured via a 13 or 15 hour bus drive to Corcoran. Upon arrival I was given the Corcoran introduction also called the Corcoran welcome during which I was assaulted by 3 prison officers, then paraded around in disregard of my condition (weak from the hunger strike and leg injuries from the assault, which made it difficult for me to walk) until I blacked out. I woke up in the Intensive Care Unit on the 20th day. During my time at Corcoran I was denied all type of CDC forms and my assault injuries were ignored as soon as I mentioned staff assault as the cause. Upon arrival at PBSP I filed two CDC 602s alleging torture and assault, which are still pending.

In my current lawsuit I allege racial discrimination since the gang management targets Hispanic prisoners and validates and segregates them at disproportionate rates in comparison to any other race. I took this angle because most validation appeals are defeated by the courts application of the standard which only requires the “same evidence” to maintain a prisoner on indefinite segregation. In my angle of racial discrimination, a different standard of law will be applied of which will require more scrutiny of the CDC’s actions. In order to prevail I need to show the disproportionate segregation of Hispanic prisoners, and as you know we cannot rely on the CDC’s numbers. So I’m wondering if you can help in providing me with an actual number of prisoners in the CDC and their race, and then the actual number of prisoners in segregation and their race etc.? So that we can break down the numbers and show it to the courts.

MIM(Prisons) responds: We commend this prisoner for taking multiple approaches to the fight against the injustice system. Legal and organizational battles are both important. While we are not familiar with his lawsuit or the legal requirements around claims of racial segregation, this fits right in with our work to gather accurate statistics on control units in prisons across the country. We will supply the information we have to this prisoner, and we ask others to help with this project by requesting a survey to fill out about their prison and any others they know well.

Dear MIM,

I was the person in your article in ULK # 5 page 9. I was beaten for no other reason than the color of my skin! The pigs tried to pay me off with a television, in order to keep quiet. I’ve filed a grievance with the facility, but they all work with each other. I wrote to the Inspector General of New York, no help. I need a civil rights attorney to represent me, most attorneys in this area are friends of the officers responsible for my injuries: black eye, lost tooth, fractured rib cage, back cuts and welts.

MIM(Prisons) adds: Unfortunately there are not enough lawyers out there willing to take on cases like this. We are adding this to the campaigns page of our website because we are getting a lot of interest in this incident. But this is not unusual. Anyone who can offer assistance can contact this comrade through MIM(Prisons) by mail or email.

I would like to expand on some very pivotal issues, starting with Senator Barrack Obama. I am 100% not fooled by Obama’s tactics. I’ve come to see that Mr. Barrack Obama has been trying to capitalize on his skin color and his short time in the projects to trick the oppressed people of this nation into believing he is one of us. The thing that me and Senator Obama have in common is our skin color. Barrack Obama is part of the bourgeois political line. He’s not for the people, he’s only for using the oppressed people for his own political gain.

It gets me angry when I hear people say Amerika is no longer a racist country. They are quick to use Barrack Obama to justify that statement, saying they are not racist because an African Amerikan is running for the White House. This is what I want to know: if it’s true that Amerika is no longer racist, why is it that if Barrack Obama starts talking about the empowerment of oppressed people in this country, he wouldn’t stand a chance of becoming President? This country has not changed, it only found better ways to operate its white power structure.

The new Ku Klux Klan are the Boys in Blue (police) and they are fully protected by the Korrupt Government. If you ask me, I think that half of the Amerikan police departments should be sitting in prison, on death row for the murders that they commit every day in the ghettos and barrios. Brothers and sisters, have you ever asked yourself, why do the police get away with just a slap on the wrist after committing a brutal murder? They claim to care for the children, but yet they take the parents away from them, by using lethal force, and false imprisonment tactics.

Back in 2007 the California corrections system changed its name from California Department of Corrections to California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. This is a big gimmick. They did that in the attempt to fool the public into believing that the prisons are trying to help prisoners get ready for parole. But that’s nothing but a big front. Nothing has changed, they are still operating on old tactics. They want us to stay blind so they can continue to control the minds of the prison population.

This country is built on lies, corruptness, imperialism, racism, capitalism, etc. I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, and I will not subside my resistance to this Abu-Grahibization (torture).

Sexual Violence in Prison shows Gender not about Genitalia

In 2004, pictures released from u$ prisons in Iraq showed amerikan bio-wimmin warding over primarily bio-male Iraqis in acts of rape and sexual assault. This incident helped substantiate MIM’s long-standing line that gender is not based on genitalia and that amerikans with female genitalia are in fact gendered male. The male gender, by definition, being the dominant group in gender relations under the patriarchy.

MIM had already suggested that prisoners in the united $tates might be gender oppressed before the Abu Ghraib pictures came out. This was due to the control of the sexuality and leisure time of prisoners by the state. In particular, Black men as a group are prevented from having consistent sexual relationships. This of course affects the family structure of the oppressed and therefore is a form of national oppression as well.

To help sort out the gender status of biomale prisoners, a recent Department of Justice report gives us the surprising statistics that, “In State and Federal prisons, 65% of inmate victims of staff sexual misconduct and harassment were male, while 58% of staff perpetrators were female”. (Here we are discussing the 52% of reported sexual violence in prisons where the captor assaulted captive. The rest were inmate-on-inmate assaults, addressed more below.) (1) In the general population 97% of sexual violence reports are wimmin victims and the perpetrator is generally male (around 98%). The instance of female perpetrators is actually a higher rate in instances of assaults on males, estimated at around 14%. (2) Much higher than female assaults on wimmin, but nowhere near the 58% of assaults on prisoners of any biology.

With 93% of the u.$. prison population being male, we would expect a much higher percentage of assaults to be against males than females, even if rates of assault for wimmin was higher. But assuming 97% of victimization is of bio-wimmin as it is on the street, you’d only get 29% of the absolute number of assaults being against men in prison. So we’re seeing a ratio of male to female victims on the order of 2 times the general population. In other words, if wimmin are five times as likely to be assaulted in prison than they are on the street, then men are 10 times as likely.

Unfortunately, the study does not breakdown the statistics of female on male vs. female on female assaults. But even if we assume that all of the 35% of staff sexual assaults on wimmin in state and federal prisons are perpetrated by wimmin, that leaves another 23% of the perpetrators who are females attacking males (assuming one-to-one incidents, which was the vast majority). Even if you want to argue that no male guards ever sexually assault female prisoners, you see a significantly greater rate of bio-wimmin engaging in sexual violence against males in prison compared to the general population. Since female assaults on males in the general population are much higher than female assaults on females, we would be better off assuming the opposite. If we assume a proportional breakdown you’d be comparing 58% female perpetrators against bio-men in prison against the 14% on the street. If that weren’t bad enough, we must factor in that females are still only a minority of prison staff, accounting for 22% in the federal system. (3) So that 58% of assailants is coming from maybe a quarter of the staff that happen to be bio-wimmin. These are the statistics that back up our line on Lynndie England that it could have been any amerikkkan womyn sexually assaulting Iraqi bio-men. And if we acknowledge that Iraqis under occupation are much more powerless and oppressed than amerikan citizens, then these statistics speak even louder to say that amerikan bio-wimmin are the enemies of the oppressed.

So first we saw that the vulnerability of men to sexual assault increases twice as much as wimmin after incarceration. On the flip side, we see bio-wimmin working for the state greatly increase their rates of assault compared to wimmin on the street. They go so far as to overcome men at the state and federal levels. In local jails the stats were closer to life on the streets, with 80% of the victims of staff sexual assault being female and 79% of perpetrators being male. (1) But even there a 20% rate of victimization of bio-men and 21% rate of assault by bio-wimmin is a noticeable difference.

Prisoners More Vulnerable than Wimmin?

While it is important to move away from one-on-one relationships in trying to understand gender systematically, incidents of sexual violence remains a widely accepted and useful indicator of gender oppression. The DOJ study showed sexual violence to be reported by prisoners at a rate of 2.9 per 1000 (it is not broken down by biology). This is about the same rate that 16-24 year old people, the age group with the highest rate, report sexual assault in the general population. The overall rate of reported sexual assault in the united $tates is 0.8 per 1,000 according to Department of Justice statistics. Only counting wimmin, the rate is 1.4 per 1000. Going back to prisoners, if we only look at state prisons the rate was 3.75 per 1000. All of these statistics are based on reported cases, and there could be reporting discrepancies between these groups. However, the statistics for prisoners are reported by the prisons, whereas the other stats are reported directly by the individual to the survey. Therefore, incidents not reported to police may be captured in the general population data, while they will not be reflected in the prisoner data.

So, it seems that prisoners (of both genders) and youth (of both genders) are reporting more sexual assaults than wimmin over all. If being young or incarcerated is really twice as risky as having female genitalia as the report rates suggest, then not only are there other considerations to determine someone’s gender status, but there are factors that are much more important than what genitalia a persyn is born with. Below we will see how age and incarceration intersect to create one of the most gender oppressed groups in the united $tates.

MIM has established the basis for gender as purely gender in a persyn’s physical development, age and health status. Therefore, when nation and class are not major complicating factors, such as within the amerikan labor aristocracy, these are the basis for gender differences.

However, the greatest differences in gender are found between the imperialist nations and the Third World people. Therefore when we talk about the spectrum of gender oppression we place most First Worlders on the male end of the spectrum, regardless of biology. We have demonstrated how First World bio-wimmin benefit by the patriarchy elsewhere. (4) The picture of bio-wimmin as sexual assailants in prisons above only adds to this argument. Now let’s continue to look at how bio-men in the internal semi-colonies suffer under patriarchy via the criminal injustice system.

Are Black Men Gendered Female?

MIM circles have suggested that Black men could be gendered female due to their high rates of incarceration and historical vulnerability to whites who accuse them of rape. In other words, their gender power is limited by white hysteria around the Black rapist, and Black crime in general, in the context of a white-dominated society. The recently released statistics on sexual assault in prisons help to support this argument.

Among staff perpetrators in prisons and jails, 71% were white; 20%, black; and 7%, “Hispanic” and these averages were pretty similar to jails and prisons taken alone. (1) It’s hard to argue that the 71% is a disproportionate number of assaults by white staff, as that is close to the representation of whites in the general population. However, in most service or otherwise undesirable fields of work, whites are becoming less common. It is a contradiction of our times that Blacks and Latinos are doing more of the footwork of the criminal injustice system than ever before. In the federal bureau of prisons whites make up only 57.2% of the staff. This number likely varies greatly among state prisons and local jails. Many states are still working on the good ’ol boy network, but some more prosperous states have taken the neo-colonial approach.

Among inmate victims, 80% were white; 14%, Black; and 5%, “Hispanic” in local jails, while 54% were white; 32%, Black; and 12% “Hispanic” in state and federal prisons. (1) In this data you see once again that whites are disproportionately the victims, even if they are slightly more likely to be the perpetrators. A couple explanations for this are suggested below. Even using the state and federal prison data, whites are 1.5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted than average, while Blacks and Latinos are below average for the prison population.

However, if you create an index based on the general population and not on prison populations you’ll see that the u$ prison system results in Black bio-men facing much more sexual assault than other bio-men, especially whites who now have an index below average at 0.78 (see figure 1). By comparing these indexes between Blacks and whites one can see that when someone is born in the united $tates, h chances of being raped in h life would be 3.3 times greater if she is Black as opposed to white, ignoring other factors.

The identity politics crowd takes a mechanistic approach to oppression, giving the Black gay wimmin the pedestal of the most oppressed. They often put the straight Black man and straight white womyn on a similar level as each having one strike against them. But not only have Blacks historically been at the bottom of the national hierarchy in the united $tates, in the realm of gender they can compete with the white womyn pretty well for the title of oppressed. In general, all u$ citizens are gendered male anyway though. Just as the Black man is torn between his position as an amerikan citizen and an oppressed national, he is able to taste great gender privilege as well as oppression.

But Prisoners are Rapists Too

The Bureau of Justice reports that 48% of the incidents of sexual violence reported by prisoners were perpetrated by other prisoners. The idea that prisoners rape each other is nothing new to amerikans. It is probably more surprising to cop-loving amerikans that 52% of the incidents were actually perpetrated by prison staff, despite research that has shown the tendency of people to mistreat others when they have control over them in an oppressive prison environment.

One question that comes to the forefront in looking at prisoner-on-prisoner rape is whether these instances parallel lines of national oppression, with the oppressed being disproportionately victimized in gender relations. However, the prisoner perpetrators of sexual assault according to the reported incidents are approximately representative of the prison population by nationality. Meanwhile, the victims of rape are 72% white, when whites only make up 35% of the general prison population. As mentioned above, the accusal of rape against Blacks and other oppressed nations has been a tool of both national and gender oppression. It is possible that some of this statistic is an exaggeration based on white hysteria. But there are also reasons to believe that whites may face greater threats of sexual assault, such as the decline of white street organizations and the association of whites with the power structure. Franz Fanon and Eldridge Cleaver both talk about the socio-political motivations behind the pursuit or rape of white wimmin by Black men. In the all-male prison environment the white man can step in to play this symbolic role. If anything, gender is used as a counter-balance to national oppression among prisoners more than an extension of white power. It is on the systematic level that Blacks are facing significantly more gender oppression as explained above.

One area there seems to be a significant difference in rates of victimization is between different agegroups of prisoners. MIM sees age as part of the gender strand of oppression, so this seems intuitive. In the last two years of data, victims were on average younger than perpetrators. The latest data from 2006, show that 44% of victims were age 24 or younger, while 81% of perpetrators were age 25 or older. Unless 44% or more of the prison population are under age 24 (U.$. Dept of Justice does not seem to publish this data), the most vulnerable age group to sexual assault appears to be disproportionately more vulnerable once put in prison. Another source indicates that youth in adult prisons are 5 times as likely to be sexually assaulted than if they were in a youth prison. (6)

Some 82% of the victims in inmate on inmate sexual assaults were male. Where assaults are almost exclusively same-sex this is merely indicative of the significantly greater propensity for men to rape. But we cannot ignore the fact that 82% of the victims are bio-men as well. It is clearly a case of population dynamics. In this sense prisons are a perfect example to prove that gender relations are not dependent on having certain genitalia. By eliminating bio-wimmin, sexual assault does not disappear, in fact it increases for a variety of reasons in prison. And we see factors such as age, health status and physical development more clearly define a persyn’s gender status. The young, physically small, mentally ill but physically healthy are the primary targets for gender oppression. (7)

In some ways the patriarchy within prisons is just a reflection of the greater society and in others it is a more extreme microcosm of power dynamics. This is indicative of the two levels on which fighting gender oppression in prisons must be conducted. The first level requires the transformation of the prison system to one that builds communal values rather than being a tool of oppression and punishment. The second requires combatting the eroticization of power in society in general and the dismantling of the patriarchy. Both require the revolutionary dictatorship of the oppressed to become realistic.

In the meantime, the extremes of amerikan prison life serve as an educational tool for the masses. It is much easier for a group to accept the “all sex is rape” line when they have been on both sides of patriarchal oppression, when they’ve been the victims of the extreme power dynamics of prison life, and when many have had their own gender privilege taken away for doing what every one else is doing and just calls sex or love. It is in these ways that we take some positive lessons from these statistics for the future building of a proletarian feminist vanguard among lumpen youth in the united $tates.

The clearer lesson we take from all this is the negative lesson of the alliance of amerikan bio-wimmin to the patriarchy. The group that is traditionally considered the greatest victim of patriarchy by the white nationalist left is behind 58% of sexual assaults in u$ prisons. That just doesn’t add up.

“Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people, by its example. Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law: it invites every man to become a law unto himself.”Olmstead v. U. S., 277 U. S. 439, 485 (1927)

In April 2007, Richard Rowlette became the new Assistant Warden at Red Onion State Prison (ROSP). Rowlette had previously worked at ROSP in the position of Security Chief from the time that the prison opened in 1998 until December 1999. During that time he was a principal administrative player and ringleader in the racist abuses that won ROSP its reputation for prisoner mistreatment. He was instrumental in helping ROSP gain national notoriety as one of the country’s most abusive prisons.

Since his promotion to Assistant Warden, I have filed an official complaint with Rowlette concerning ROSP officials refusing me telephone contact with two attorneys who had offered me their professional assistance. I presented a request to Rowlette to allow me to call these two lawyers.

Months before, both of these lawyers had verified their credentials and their intent and efforts to advise and assist me in litigation against various ROSP staff, including my assigned counselor John Sykes and the chief warden Tracy Ray. One of these lawyers is Mr. Malik Shabazz. Upon being informed of my ongoing experiences of abuse at ROSP (abuse which is a response to my political activism and continuing exposure of abuses at the prison), Mr. Shabazz decided to support me. Mr. Shabazz happens to be the Chairman of the New Black Panther Party (NBPP), an organization with which I have no affiliation.

Rowlette’s response was that if he had anything to do with it I’d never talk to a lawyer. When I pointed out that this was a basic constitutional right, he responded, “Your people have no rights.” I am New Afrikan (Black) so his meaning was obvious. I filed a complaint. I also filed a complaint about being denied contact with my lawyers for months, despite their repeated attempts to arrange legal calls with me. Rowlette responded to my complaint with a memo stating that my request to have confidential legal calls to these lawyers was “DENIED.” In this memo he rationalizes denying me legal calls by claiming that no attorney-client relationship exists between me and these lawyers.

The memo states that unless I prove that they are actively representing me in litigation pending in a court of record in Virginia, I will be denied legal calls. It specifically states that a letter from a lawyer stating the she is representing me “will not suffice.” The memo also states, “Your request is further DENIED in regards to Mr. Malik Shabazz due to his involvement with the New Black Panther Party. To allow unrecorded phone calls between you and the President/Founder of the New Black Panther Party would present an unacceptable risk to the Security of this Facility.”

For the benefit of any doubters, I’ve attached a copy of Rowlette’s initialed memo.

Rowlette’s memo breaks a barrel full of criminal laws. In Virginia it is a crime for any person to interfere with the relationship of confidence and trust that must exist between a lawyer and her/his client. It is also a crime for any one not licensed to practice law to present himself as qualified to give legal opinions. Both of these acts constitute the crime of “unauthorized practice of law.”’

Rowlette has no legal training or authority to define the attorney-client relationship. He certainly cannot use any such unauthorized definition to block confidential communications between a lawyer and client. Indeed, the Virginia Supreme Court itself has defined what constitutes an attorney/client relationship. The court’s definition is quite different from Rowlette’s. In the U.S., it is the function of the courts to define and interpret the laws and the functions of executives (including prison officials), to enforce and apply those laws.

In its definitive document “Practice of Law in the commonwealth of Virginia” (PLCV), the Virginia Supreme Court defines the attorney-client relationship as follows:

“Generally, the relation of attorney and client exists and one is deemed to be practicing law whenever he furnishes to another advice or services under circumstances which imply his possession and use of legal knowledge or skill.

“Specifically, the relation of attorney and client exists, and one is deemed to be practicing law whenever (I.) One undertakes… to advise another… in any matter involving the application of legal principles to facts or purposes or desires. (2) One … undertakes, with or without compensation, to prepare for another legal
instruments of any character…(3) One undertakes, with or without compensation, to represent the interest of another before any tribunal judicial, administrative, or
executive…”

Rowlette’s memo presumes to overrule the high court’s definition of the attorney-client relationship. Using his unlawful definition, he has barred me from confidential contact with these lawyers. The bigger absurdity is the obvious Catch-22 in Rowlette’s position. A lawyer must be able to consult with a client in order to gather the information necessary to file a lawsuit for him/her. If I am blocked from confidential communications with lawyers, then they will never be able to bring litigation on my behalf. This is the real intent behind Rowlette’s game.

As for Mr. Shabazz’s NBPP membership, Rowlette presents no evidence that this affiliation threatens prison security. As a federal lawyer, Mr. Shabazz is foremost an officer of the courts. If his private organizational affiliations conflicted with his professional status, Mr. Shabazz would not be permitted to maintain his legal license.

Furthermore Rowlette has directed ROSP mailroom clerks to intercept, open, read, and refuse to send out mail that is clearly identified as “legal mail” intended for lawyers. These mailroom officials, based upon Rowlettes’ position, refuse to treat or process mail to and from lawyers as confidential legal mail in blatant violation of VDOC mail policy. This is a federal crime, obstructing U.S. mails,² and violates my constitutional rights to free speech and to privacy in my legal mail.

History of Abuse at Red Onion State Prison

When ROSP first began operating in 1998, it developed almost instantly a nationwide reputation for racism and abuses of its predominantly nonwhite prisoner population by its near exclusively white staff.

In response to receiving a flood of letters from ROSP prisoners complaining of unjustified transfers to ROSP and of frequent and widespread racism, brutality and general abuse, Human Rights Watch (HRW) attorney Jamie Fellner conducted an independent investigation into conditions at the remote Virginia prison. Virginia Department of Corrections (VDOC) officials refused to cooperate with the investigation.

Ms. Fellner’s findings were set out in an April 1999 HRW report entitled Red Onion State Prison:Super-Maximum Security Confinement in Virginia.³

This report touched on the various abusive conditions and treatments suffered by ROSP prisoners and found that many of those assigned to the prison did not meet the criteria for “supermax” confinement. Actually almost none did. Seven pages of the report focused on incidents and practices in the “Use of Force” at the prison. One incident described in that section stands out and is particularly relevant here:

“One inmate told HRW that immediately upon arrival at Red Onion in September 1998, he and other inmates were told to strip and permit a visual body search, including by spreading their buttocks. Female staff were present—indeed one was taking a video of the proceedings—and the inmate was reluctant to do as ordered in front of them. A captain shot him with the taser in the presence of the warden, associate warden and a major. After the inmate had been tasered, the major screamed in his ear, “Boy, you’re at Red Onion now” and then told the other officers to “get that nigger out of here.” The inmate filed a grievance because he felt—correctly—that he should not have had to submit to a visual body search strip in front of female staff.

“The inmate’s grievance was denied. The warden acknowledged that a taser had been used because the inmate hesitated to strip and thus ‘was failing to obey instructions.’ The denial was upheld by the regional director without comment ‘based on the information provided.’ There was no effort to suggest that application of physical force was warranted by any possibility of danger or that nonphysical effort to persuade the inmate had been attempted and failed. The use of the taser appears more likely to have been a deliberate and malicious excessive use of force calculated to intimidate new arrivals to the facility.

“In denying the inmate’s grievance, Warden George Deeds stated that post orders at Red Onion permit females to work at any post in this case, assignment to the video camera. It is widely recognized, however that cross-gender strip searches violate inmates’ ‘Individual dignity and right to privacy’. The warden’s policy at Red Onion ignores basic correctional principles and international standards prohibiting cross-gender strip searches unless in an emergency.” (pp. 21-22)

The prisoner who was the victim of this abusive strip search and unwarranted attack was XXXX XXXX. Indeed, most every prisoner assigned to ROSP during that time, including myself, were subjected to this cross-gender strip search process, during which it was often demanded that we repeatedly manipulate our genitals and spread our buttocks.

These searches were conducted under threat of being immediately tasered. A taser was trained on us throughout the strip search process. We were bodily subdued and searched by force by a mob of guards who were always present and dressed out in full riot armor. We were then escorted to our new cell assignment. Most were literally dragged stark naked through the prison while being observed nude by multitudes of guards, both male and female, as well as by other prisoners.

The entire process was calculated to humiliate and terrorize new arrivals and convey the message that at ROSP we would comply without hesitation with any staff demands, no matter how abusive or arbitrary. If we failed to promptly comply or questioned the demands, we would be met with immediate overwhelming force and further humiliation.

To convey this message these officials deliberately created a situation (for example the cross gender strip searches) calculated to provoke our resistance or hesitation and thereby justify the
premeditated intent to use overwhelming force.⁴

Before Abu Ghraib there was Red Onion.⁵

Richard Rowlette: Crime Time at ROSP

The Major who was personally present and supervised most of these intake strip searches, the very same major that screamed in XXXX’s ear and told guards to “’get that nigger out of here,” was Richard Rowlette.

XXXX subsequently filed and won a lawsuit concerning the incident. The court found that the officials had violated his constitutional rights, which is a federal crime.⁶ XXXX was then transferred away from ROSP and hasn’t since returned. However, the multitudes of other prisoners who were subjected to the same treatments and worse, including myself, were granted no relief

In the wake of extensive bad media, the HRW report, and a U. S. Department of Justice investigation, Rowlette was assigned to another VDOC prison in Powhatan County, but not before he acted to settle a long standing vendetta he had against me.

On December 6, 1999, the day before he left ROSP, and in a departing last show of power, Rowlette attempted to force me to talk to him at my cell door. I ignored him. I generally refuse to engage him in conversation. This enrages him, as he believes he can intimidate prisoners to do whatever he demands under threat of having them attacked by guards.

Because I wouldn’t talk to him, Rowlette had two extraction teams of some 10 guards assembled at my cell in full riot armor, with two 50,000 volt electric shields and a 36 ounce canister of gas. Under his direct supervision and direction I was gassed for an entire hour while the entire canister was emptied into the cell. This level of gas was far in excess of the 6 grams that federal courts have found to be an “estimated lethal dose” when sprayed into a small closed-in cell.⁷ He then had me sprayed with more gas from a smaller canister that guards generally carry on their sides. This was a clear attempt to torture and murder me by asphyxiation.

I was then met with violent attack by the two teams of armored guards. After being restrained and strapped down to the bunk in 5-point restraints⁸ for 48 hours (in the still contaminated cell), I was electrocuted repeatedly. For the entire two days in restraints I was denied water, meals, medication, and restroom breaks. This is all documented and on record in the U.S. District Court in Roanoke.⁹

Rowlette had remarked that he had hoped I’d refuse to talk to him and that the attack he’d orchestrated was his “going away present” to me. His spell away from ROSP was merely a “cooling off period” and a token move by VDOC officials to create a public appearance of responding to abusive conditions at ROSP. Indeed, there was little effect on abuse levels after he left.

Promoting Official Criminals as the Norm

Rewarding criminally inclined prison officials in Virginia is the norm. For example, one guard, David Allen Taylor (a prior captain at ROSP), has been found guilty in several prisoner lawsuits of involvement in beatings and abuses of Black prisoners. in one such case, a prisoner YYYY YYYY, won a monetary judgment against Taylor. The state not only paid the judgment for Taylor (your tax dollars at work), but he was promoted in the meantime from lieutenant to captain. Just this year, he was promoted again, to major, at one of the VDOC’s new prisons.

Another guard, William Wright, is widely known for assaulting Black prisoners at ROSP while they are fully restrained. His attacks have resulted in broken bones, dislocations, lacerations, and other serious injuries. Wright was recently promoted from corporal to sergeant.

Indeed an unmistakable pattern and long-standing trend in the VDOC is to promote guards who are being sued by prisoners for abuses while they have litigation pending against them. This is a ploy to bolster the professional image of abusive guards in order to create bias in their favor. Furthermore, the state defends abusive guards against prisoner litigation no matter how obvious their guilt and no matter what their offense. And as occurred with David Taylor, the state pays any monetary judgments awarded, no wonder there is no fear of consequences for abuses.

Most of the abuses at ROSP are captured on videotape, but those records are routinely erased, which is a crime in Virginia. ¹⁰ So where do the illegalities end and “justice” come into play? Rowlette won’t be prosecuted for his crimes. This contributes to the cavalier attitude of officials towards the very laws they are sworn to uphold. Indeed what is a man like Rowlette doing running a prison? Ain’t prisons in Amerika supposed to exist to punish and deter criminals? Where are all the tough on crime politicians when you need them?

Power to the People!

Notes;
¹ In Part 6 Section II of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia, “Introduction,” the Supreme Court states: “any person practicing law without being duly authorized or licensed is guilty of a misdemeanor.” The statue under which this crime is enforced is Code of Virginia section 54.1-3904. The Supreme Court has promulgated a set of Unauthorized Practice Rules (UPR) which outline some specific acts which constitute a criminal unauthorized practice of law. Rowlette’s actions violate the following UPR’s:

“UPR 3-101. Attorney Client Relationship”: (A) An agency shall not disrupt the relationship of confidence and trust which must exist between a lawyer and his client.
“UPR 9-101. Holding Out as an Expert”: (A) A non-lawyer shall not hold himself out as authorized to furnish another advice or service under circumstances which imply his possession of legal knowledge.”

I got your information off the internet via my familia on the streets. And I felt compelled to reach out to you, as well as to share with you a little bit about myself and the struggles my loved ones and I have been blessed with. The state will tell you I’m here for a second degree murder. Of course I will tell you that it is much more complicated than that. My co-defendants, (three out of four of them were relatives) faced frivolous allegations of “gang association.” Imagine that, you grow up in the barrio and know some, even grew up with some, “gang members” and they labeled us all a gang and called the alleged drunken brawl a gang fight, which legally, totally changed and prejudiced “the states of mind and intentions” of alleged to have been involved. Due to enormous pressure, I buckled and took this sentence, not because I’m guilty as charged, but in order to save my familia from receiving life sentences as well.

Regardless, I’m in this system. “I have lived within the Monster, and I know it from within.” (Jose Marti) All of my life I’ve soaked up bits and pieces of revolutionary consciousness, always drawn like the proverbial moths to a flame to the defiant, the warriors and martyrs. Those brave and solid enough to see the bigger picture, and to lead and sacrifice for the people. But somehow my adolescent desires and undefined morals and standards led me to mis-invest this warriors spirit into gang banging. I can see from my present point of view, that I was not extraordinary in my misdirected efforts.

However, I have always strived for something bigger and better. Something beneficial to the people, La Raza, instead of solely destructive and degenerate. But I lacked the education, I lacked the consistent guidance and discipline, and I, like most of the huddled masses from the Barrio and otherwise, had to focus on survival. But now, for the last 5 years, “due to [my] case factors” and the resulting label put upon me as a “Northern Hispanic,” by the State, have had some time on my hands to focus, to explore, and develop ideas and ideals.

More than enough time, as I’d spent 3 years in the county in single occupancy cells, a year and a half on Solano’s level three facility I on lockdown and I’ve spent over six months now in Administrative Segregation (the hole), where I’m facing a “gang validation.” As is well known, the State applies social Judo tactics, so to speak, in order to keep the masses off balance and misdirected. In these divide and conquer scenarios social organizations and movements for resisting oppression and exploitation, and in furtherance of equality, empowerment, and dignity, find their focus degenerated and misdirected towards other members of their own backgrounds.

This is nothing new, and we still don’t make it difficult for them to do. These tactics have literally been perfected to a science: within the confines of the CDCR. The technical aspects of these tactics are ever evolving, seemingly made up as they go, as well as laid out in a long winded maze of words (which seem really to only be there for show or manipulation) in the California code of Regulations Title 15 and the Department Operations Manual.

For example: “Gang means any ongoing formal or informal organization, association or group of (3) or more persons which has a common name or identifying sign or symbol whose members and or associates individually or collectively engage or have engaged, on behalf of that organization, or group, in (2) or more acts which include, planning, organizing threatening, financing, soliciting, or committing unlawful acts or acts of misconduct classified as serious pursuant to section 3315.”

“Disruptive Group means any gang other than a prison gang.” (of which there are (10) different general labels, (3) of which are relative to Latinos in particular.)

“Prison Gang means any gang which originated and has its roots within the department or any other prison system” (3 out of 5 labels are specifically Raza). “Member is an inmate/parolee who has been accepted into membership by a gang. This identification requires at least (3) independent source items of documentation indicative of actual membership. Validation of an inmate/parolee as a member of a prison gang whall require that at least (1) source item be a direct link to a current or former Validated member or associate of the gang…Associate is an inmate/parolee who is involved periodically or regularly with members or associates of a gang…”

“A dropout is an inmate/parolee who was either a gang member or associate and has discontinued gang affiliation. This identification requires that the inmate/parolee successfully complete the debriefing process.”

“2. Except as provided at section 3335(a), section 3378(d) and subsection (c )(5), a validated prison gang member or associate is deemed to be a severe threat to the safety of others or the security of the institution and will be placed in a SHU for an indeterminate term.”

“4. A validated prison gang member or associate shall be considered for release from a SHU, as provided above, after the inmate is verified as a gang dropout through a debriefing process.”

“5. As provided at section 3378(3), the Departmental Review Board (DRB) may authorize SHU release for prison gang members or associates categorized as inactive. The term inactive means that the inmate has not been involved in gang activity for a minimum of (6) years. Inmates categorized as inactive who are suitable for SHU release shall be transferred to the general population of a level IV facility for a period of observation that shall be no greater than 12 months. Upon completion of the period of observation, the inmate shall be housed in a facility commensurate with his or her safety needs. In the absence of safety needs, the inmate shall be housed in a facility consistent with his or her classification score….”

“6. As provided at section 3378(f) an inmate categorized as inactive or validated as a dropout of a prison gang and placed in the general population may be returned to segregation based upon one reliable source item identifying the inmate as a currently active gang member or associate of the prison gang with which the inmate was previous validated…”

I myself, despite my objections, was labeled a “Northern Hispanic” by this system. In fact, probably a quarter of the prisoners labeled as such were and are not gang members of any kind, but are forced by the system into accepting this generic label, which in turn makes you an automatic target by other certain group segments. Perhaps most potentially detrimental is the system’s obsession with validating each and every prisoner they label a (N/H/) as a prison gang member/associate in order to bury them alive in the confines of the SHUs.

Those prisoners labeled NHs are routinely placed on prolonged lockdowns, having constantly to defend themselves and to fight for basic safety and continually push for equality, as well as, and perhaps more harmful, the chronic violations and abuse of our rights and mental and physical well being, from the State, who, in their zeal to justify their actions, do so by habitually breaking the laws they pretend to uphold.

There are many clear and obvious discrepancies in treatment, as well as in application of the laws and regulations used to govern the CDCR. For instance, while NHs were on lockdown, they were denied visits, adequate and timely medical care, there were incidents of NHs being physically abused. The NHs often only came out of their cells 3 days out of the week for 5 minute showers, only to be yelled at and degraded throughout, and this, even during heat waves and times where there was no air circulation in the oven like cells due to air circulation system breaking down. The NHs were denied access to phone use, access to the law library, I can go on and on.

I myself ended up on Ad. Seg a few weeks before the NHs were let off of lockdown. On the day I was brought here, about 3 or 4 in the morning, the door to the cell my old celly and I occupied was opened, I was sprayed 3 times in the face with a chemical significantly more powerful than pepper spray, handcuffed, and here I am now, facing a ridiculous “gang validation” on trumped up charges.

In May 2006 inmates of all racial classifications were lulled into a false sense of security as the totalitarians blanket approach to punishment was lifted only to be used again disproportionately against one aspect of the inmate population. It is our belief that the blanket approach was to disguise this administrations racist tactics in their dealings with inmates. Now that it is applied to only one segment of the inmate population it is all the more clear. As is stated in my first “Calipatria under siege” report, the “Hispanic” inmate population of Calipatria suffer disproportionate punishment as opposed to the several other racial designations [MIM ed: we will use Latino instead of Hispanic, but in California prisons this is almost entirely interchangeable with Mexican]. Now with living evidence I submit this second “communiqué” from the front line that is Calipatria State Prison.

As stated in May 2006, the blanket of torture was lifted and tensions eased only to be complicated once again by a “skirmish” between “southern Hispanics” [MIM ed - prison label] and correctional staff, and though the blanket was not unfurled for a great length of time we believe out of sheer oversight and not from a merciful standpoint. The blanket of torture was lifted in exchange for a blanket of psychological warfare with reminders of the totalitarians power to inflict wounds both physical as well as mental as is mentioned in the latest skirmish and the subsequent disappearances of “southern Hispanics.”

A return to “normal” program was beginning from total lockdown that began in July of 2005 where we were denied everything from yard exercise to canteen to adequate hygiene products to legal relief. Most services were said to be slowly re-implemented to the inmate population using a screening process where inmates were returned to a program status in accordance with prison behavior, the most programs/privileges to inmates who have the most appealing prison history and the least programs privileges with the least appealing history. This “screening” is a farce! It only applies to the Latino inmate population. Other inmates were afforded all programs and privileges immediately while the Latino population were/are subjected to this screening, where only approximately 5 Latinos from each of this sub-facilities’ four general population buildings were afforded all programs and privileges on a weekly basis (approx 20 each week). The remainder were/are merely afforded canteen and package program access. No yard exercise, no vocation education, no work programs, etc., a continued punishment merely for being Latino. It’s obvious this screening of those most willing to program has no bearing on the administrations decision of who to “release” or “gradually unlock” to full programs/privileges as all Latino inmates have and show their willingness to program in accordance to prison procedures.

This administration utilizes methods to deal with or remove the so-called “un-desirables” with several steps in the disciplinary procedures. For example, placement in the “hole” for those who seriously disrupt the programs or “C” status - a confined to quarters type punishment for those who refuse to work (to name a couple). My point is, that aside from the above mentioned individuals undergoing disciplinary procedures, the remainder of the 99.9% of Latino inmates have not committed a disciplinary infraction to warrant this ongoing punishment. Those who have committed a disciplinary infraction that are not removed to the hole or placed on “C” status have not committed an infraction of a serious enough nature to warrant this ongoing punishment.

Furthermore in September the blanket was unfurled once again when the entire prison population was placed on lockdown due to weapons being found and unfounded “intelligence” which allegedly stated the weapons were to be used to assault staff. In the beginning the entire institution was placed on lockdown with all programs suspended and searches of the entire institution conducted. The administration’s racist policies surfaced in a statement by administration posted on the institution information channel for the inmate population to read, where it stated “certain segments of the inmate population continue to disrupt the program of all the segments.”

At first reading nothing is amiss, until all the racial segments of this institution were released from lockdown and afforded all program/privileges. That is, except the Latino population! Now this statement by administration takes on new life. Now, “certain segments” means Latinos, where blame for the weapons and so-called “intelligence” is placed squarely on the Latino population. The weapons in question were not found on any one person, but in a common area accessible to all. Yet alleged “intelligence” was used to attribute the weapons to Latinos. It should be noted the intelligence used by administration is not refutable nor is there given any proof of its authenticity as it is “confidential.” The Latinos thereby have no legal recourse to challenge said “intelligence” as fabricated, false or even to prove it’s actual existence. Again, disproportionate decision followed with punishment based on blatant racial attribution of weapons said to belong to Latinos, based as stated on unfounded and unchallengeable “intelligence.”

As of this writing, December 2006, the Latinos are again under the “screening” process prior to unlock of lockdown and access to all programs/privileges. And again in a manner disproportionate to the other races who were not subjected to the screening. As stated the entire Latino population, merely by being housed in this prison in the general population, is proof positive of each inmates individual as well as collective willingness, desire and goal to program in accordance to prison procedures, like that of other racial segments. (Calipatria is a 270 design prison - meaning less restrictive level 4 for level 4 inmates who have and are positively programming). Like that of the other racial segments, some individuals or groups have been alleged to have committed disciplinary infractions serious enough to disrupt programs where the said are removed from general population to the hole while the remainder suffer the residual effects of those infractions with lockdowns. Yet as stated above, the Latino population suffers punishment disproportionately.

One only has to view our objective conditions to see the racial overtones where Latinos as a whole are viewed as the undesirable elements of the prison population. But not undesirable for any disciplinary infractions committed as a whole but for merely being Latino. Where disciplinary infractions are committed by other racial segments of the inmate population are viewed as “isolated incidents,” Latino disciplinary infractions are viewed as an alleged collective conspiracy and any and all weapons found are attributed to Latinos, allegedly corroborated by unchallengeable ’intelligence” notorious Calipatria State Prison.

The intensity of the psychological war has gained momentum and although raids, property seizures and disappearances have lessened, they continue none the less. And although by all outward appearances Calipatria is in compliance with inmates’ rights, those of the Latino prisoners are denied, suspended or lessened and suffer the whims of a totalitarian administrative body. And although it’s no longer 120 degrees outside, it is still cold in the shadow of the Green wall and the Latinos are still under siege.

MIM adds: This tactic of dividing the prisons along national lines is one of many used by the prison administration to keep prisoners fighting each other rather than uniting against a common enemy. Even the appearance of preferential treatment for one nationality over another can contribute to this division. Rather than focus on this inequality, MIM calls on prisoners of all nationalities to unite in fighting the unjust policies of the administration. The real enemy is the criminal injustice system, and unity behind bars will greatly advance our struggle against this enemy.