Transcript
Petition of Rectification To those with authority, obligation, alliance, and/or the will invested in them, by either the President of the United States, the Governor of Missouri, the Director of Adult Institutions, and any other officials that hold office of any significance not mentioned herein... "We, the prisoner's of the State of Missouri, who resides at the address of the Southeast Correctional Center, do petition those with authority to rectify problems, and/or laws that are being consistently and persistently broken, rights that are being unjustly violated and treatment that is tediously unbearable and inhumane that is being inflicted upon us [illegible] through the misconduct and unprofessionalism of the employees and officials of this institution". As prisoners in the State of Missouri, and of the United States of America, we are still protected by and through the liberty and justice of the United States Constitution. Therefore, certain rights shall be granted and guaranteed to us under such doctrine and law. Heretofore, the following will provide explanation in the reason for the birth of this petition. To limit the space: This petition will deal solely with the totality of conditions of our confinement. (1) No access to telephones: The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states; "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievance." The right to contact our family is protected under this clause and Amendment. The right to intimate association involves an individuals right to enter into and maintain intimate or private relationships free of state intrusion. Phi [Lambda] Phi Frat v. University of Pittsburgh, 229 F.3d 435, 441 (3rd Cir. 2000). The Court has ruled that certain restrictions may be placed on the access to telephones and telephone usage i.e., amount of calls, time limits, etc., but must be applied in a "reasonable manner." Being housed in Housing Unit #1 Administrative Segregation we aren't ever allowed these limited accessible restrictions to the telephones. The reason for this deprivation is because Housing Unit #1 is designed to be more restrictive on out-of-control inmates, but this Housing Unit is inflicted upon inmates that does not meet this criteria, but yet, we are forced to endure such infringements, without any penological legitimacy... (2) Violation of Due Process: The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states; "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of laws. Our protection under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Due Process Clause is being excessively violated by the way that we are being sanctioned on the infractions of the institutional rules in Administrative Segregation. For example; we are being given sanctions before we are teamed, heard and a findings is deemed on our alleged infraction(s) .i.e., limited property (property impoundment), alternative meal (meat loaf), magnet status etc. which results in the violation of our "procedural due process." The purpose of the Due Process Clause is to protect the individual from arbitrary and erroneous state action by requiring some kind of hearing prior to the deprivation of "live, liberty, or property." When state law mandated that no prisoner "may be punished except after a finding of guilt by the Disciplinary Hearing Officer." Yet, offenders are being placed on Removal of Property status, Magnet Status, Alternate Meal status, etc, before a hearing is held. See Gibbs v. King, 779 F.2d 1040, 1044 (5th Cir. 1986); and Armstrong v. Manzo, 380 U.S. 545, 550 (1985). Whereas, our right to procedural due process means that the prison must provide us with some category of protection (like a hearing) before the prison does something that harm our life, liberty, or interest. Therefore, receiving an sanction before we can properly or adequately prepare a defense, or are heard, teamed, and findings is deemed on the pending infraction deprives us of such rights. According to IS19-1.1 Informal Sanctions are sanctions which are verbal or written that may be used as outlined for informal resolutions of minor rule violations. Informal Sanctions are as follows: a.) Warning/reprimand, b.) activity restriction, c.) living area restriction, d.) extra duty, and e.) property impoundment. So, if such are considered as informal "resolutions" of minor rule violations, why are we being subjected to these sanctions before guilty findings of our violations are deemed? Furthermore, our due profess are being infringed upon by prisoners being found guilty solely upon an Reporting Officer's statement and conduct violation report, where conduct violations are concerned. "Several Courts have decided that in order to satisfy this constitutional mandate, prison disciplinary officials must do more than give boilerplate statements that they accept the officer's misconduct report. Rather, they must engage in specific fact finding." But this theory is heavily disregarded as non-existent dealing with the disciplinary officials of this institution. We are even denied our due process and institutional policy procedural right to present "documentary evidence" in some cases and use institutional camera footage as a witness in most cases. (3) Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution states; "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted." The Eighth Amendment forbids "cruel and unusual punishment" and is the most significant Amendment for us as prisoner's, and that is outlined in this petition. It has been interpreted to prohibit excessive force and guard brutality, as well as unsanitary dangerous, inhumane, and overly restrictive conditions. This Amendment is [repeatedly?] being violated due to the wanton [asperitive?] oppression that the Administrative Segregation Classification and Administrative staff are inflicting upon us as a body. We are being subjected to outrageously extensive administrative and disciplinary segregation time for minor conduct violations. According to 217.370 RSMO; offenders are "not to receive disciplinary segregation time exceeding 10 days "for minor violations, but yet, we are sentenced continuously to serve more than what is mandated. We are not being given projected time lines/frames on when we can feasibly entertain the thought, or notion of being released from segregation. We are literally just sitting in segregation waiting on the whims and the mercy of the Administrative Heads to let us go. According to IS21-1.2, the Offender Rulebook and Authority 217.375 RSMO: "Administrative Segregation is imposed upon offender's for the safety, security, and good order of the institution. When an offender is an immediate security risk, or an offender is violent, struggling and creating a sufficient disturbance to indicate he is not in control of himself, or an offender is physically violent, or an offender is in urgent need to be separated from others." So the question is; seeing that our current/present behavior does not constitute/define nor meet such criteria(s), why are we being held past our stipulated time of punishment? Excessive Use of Force: We are being subjected to excessive uses of force by prison guards [repeatedly?]. We are maced, bombed with mace generated grenades, electrocuted with shock shields and physically restrained and subdued by the institution's assembled "E-Team," as well as placed on property impound status for the duration of five (5) days, for a simple minor conduct violation as such as 'creating a disturbance' or 'disobeying a order.' The tactics aren't implemented to restore order or discipline to obtain control of the offender(s), these tactics are instead utilized to instill fear and to "maliciously and sadistically cause harm." Adequate Medical Treatment: Offender's assigned to Housing Unit #1 shall be allowed adequate and just as much medical treatment as Housing Unit #2 and General Population offenders. Offenders assigned to H.U. #1 are lucky to receive a sick call assiduous treatment once a month. "Justice Marchall reasoned that since the [illegible] of incarcertaion denies prisoners to care for themselves, the government has an "obligation to provide medical care for them." Yet, that obligation and medical care is partially forsaken, being an offender assigned to H.U. #1. Our medical needs are either left unattended or forgotten. But what makes this problem so amazingly asinine is that Housing Unit #1 is the smallest housing unit of the institution, wherein, make it seems as if the neglect of our medical needs are deliberate and intentional. Lack of Access to Proper Hygiene Products/Sanitation Issues: Our right to decent and sanitary conditions in prison also fall under the "Cruel and Unusual Punishment" clause of the Eighth Amendment. Prisoners are entitled to sanitary toilet facilities. Dispain v. Uphoff, 264, F.3d 965 (10th Cir. 2001), proper trash procedures, no roach or rat infestations and basic supplies such as toothpaste, soap, sanitary napkins, cleaning products, etc. Offender's in Housing Unit #1 are only allowed one (1) bar of MVE soap a week (as do all of the offenders in Ad-Seg), but the distinguishing difference between H.U. #1 and H.U. #2 offenders is that we (offenders in housing unit #1) are not allowed to purchase shampoo or shampoo bodywash combo nor toilet tissue. The administrative segregation units are so filthy and unsanitary and infested with vermin and mice that we have to sacrifice the single bar of soap that we are issued weekly, in order to sanitize and clean our cells. The housing units are so infested with mice and vermin that we are forced to use our bedlinen and state issued clothing to block the bottom of our cell doors to keep the pest from invading our living quarters. A weekly cell clean solution is offered, but the procedure in which the cell clean routine is conducted and is so unsanitary, it serves no resolution. We are issued a sponge, towel and toilet brush soaked in disinfectant water that a numerous amount of other offenders have used on their sinks, walls, floors and toilets, in which is exposing us to germs not protecting us from them. The MVE soap that we are issued is not anti-bacterial soap. The bodywash/shampoo combination soap that we are given during shower time does not possess any anti-bacterial agents in it. Whereas given these unsaitary and indecent conditions, and the time spent in between showers we shall be given the privilege to purchase soap from canteen, such as; Coast, Dial, Irish Spring, Dove etc. Other Level 5 prisons or medium/maximum prisons have adopted this privilege, so there should be no reason we are not allowed to do the same. We are all equally protected under the Fourteenth Amendment "equal protection" clause and teh "cruel and unusual punishment" clause of the Eighth Amendment. Phase Program/Incentives: As prisoners in administrative segregation, we are often looked or/viewed as worse than other offenders. As stated earlier in this petition, we are severely punished and sanctioned for our conduct violations and mistakes, but are never rewarded with incentives or even acknowledged for modifying our behavior for the good order and safety of the institution. The Administrative staff and personnel insist and/or encourage offenders in Housing Unit #1 to participate and/or enroll in Administrative Segregation classes, such as "Finding Your Voice," "Taking A Chance On Change," etc. (although they are optional) but with no benefits and unfulfilled promises. We have gone months on end free of conduct violations without recognition, but, the moment we are infringed upon and a conduct violation is issued, we are set back an additional thirty (30), sixty (60) or ninety (90) days in segregation. When disciplining offenders, there shall be no double standards. If we are to be severely, harshly or exceptionally sanctioned, punished or disciplined for violating institutional rules, we shall be graciously rewarded for doing good and modifying our behavior. Here in H.U. #1, we have offenders that have been free of conduct violations for four (4), five (5), ten (10), and twelve (12) months, but yet, have failed to receive a phone call, be released from Ad-Seg or transitions as simplistic as being transferred to H.U. #2. At other Level 5 Maximum/Medium security prisons such as J.C.C.C and PCC offenders who are forced to endure long-term solitary confinement are given incentives and reasonable privileges for modifying their behavior and going a certain amount of time conduct violation free. For example; at the Jefferson City Correctional Center, their institution have an program by the name of "The Step Up Program." Where every month or two, one goes without a conduct violation incentives and privileges are gradually given back to them. Walkman's are issued; $10, $15 of canteen is allowed for purchase every other week, etc. These methods are issued in order to give offenders something to look forward to. If we are punished for doin good and punished for doing bad, wherefore, we are not given a reason to modify our behavior in good faith. We are subjected to a "Catch 22." Heretofore, we are in asking of reasonable incentives instead of asperity deprivations. We, as a collective body declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Signed this 7 day of February, 2014.
