Reprisal labeling

Bell, Shane



2/7/2021 Reprisal Labeling In prison, nobody likes to be labeled by prison staff and others as a “rat,” “snitch”, “Buddha Rat,” “Lawyer rat,” etc. But this has been done and continues to be done openly at the Jameson Annex of the South Dakota State Penitentiary. This has been done out of reprisal for exercising my legal rights in a civil rights 1983 lawsuit, doing legetimate prison grievances and because I am a peaceful Zen Buddhist who runs the Jameson Buddhist Group. The prison staff and their favorite inmate minions have been and continue to spread the label of “Buddhist rat,” “Lawyer rat,” “rat” “snitch” to various inmates and other staff here. I have witnessed both prison staff and inmates telling new A&O inmates that “Bell is a rat,” “Buddha rat,” “Buddha snitch,” etc. in their plan to have these new inmates who will be transfered throughout the South Dakota prison system, to make my life difficult when and if I am transfered anywhere. The prison staff and their favorite inmate minions are actively trying to get me moved. They really hate spiritual prisoners and jailhouse lawyers, of which I am both. 1 over -> Prison staff who falsely label a prisoner a “snitch” or a “rat” violate their duty to protect as well as the 8th Amendment constitutional rights of the prisoner numerous courts have ruled. The same applies here with the prison staff not only verbally labeling me a “Buddha rat,” “snitch,” lawyer rat, etc. verbally, but it can be heard on the prison radio communications. This is done to harass and intimidate me. If you take this a step further, this can be considered a felony, conspiracy to commit an aggravated assault is punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a $30,000 fine or both for everyone involved, also other charges. In my civil rights lawsuit, Bell v. Young et al., civ. 16-4046 in the 8th Circuit in South Dakota, the federal judge Veronica L. Duffy even warned the Defendants, DOC and their employees in her October 31st, 2019 opinion and Order stated: “This is far broader than the narrow concept of “retaliation.” Because the defendants do not deny that this behavior is taking place, the court accepts as true Mr. Bell’s allegations, supported by his affidavit. Those allegations support an inference of acts by defendants and their employees that are designed to harass, worry, and endanger Mr. Bell’s safety among his 2 fellow prisoners. This may very well constitute “unlawful adverse effect.” At the very least, these actions are not within the spirit of paragraph 3c of the parties agreement.” I suggest that everyone reading this look up this civil rights case and the opinion and Order of October 31st 2019 at Bell v. Young, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189902 on the legal Lexis-Nexis app. Even though the judge ordered that a years worth of prison audio recordings of radio traffic and that all prison employees are to sign an acknowledgement they read 3c no retaliation clause, the behavior continues to this day like none of this was brought up in court. There is nothing more I can do other then continue to follow the teachings of the Buddha and teach the Buddhist Group. If the prison staff and their minions want to continue to discriminate, harass, and plan their illegal schemes against me, then so be it. I may have to go back to file another civil rights lawsuit. Only time will tell. Submitted by Shane Bell Shane Bell [ID number] [address] 3

Author: Bell, Shane

Author Location: South Dakota

Date: February 7, 2021

Genre: Essay

Extent: 3 pages

If this is your essay and you would like it removed from or changed on this site, refer to our Takedown and Changes policy.

Takedown and Changes Policy
Browse More Essays