I got a hold of one of the MIM Notes and am impressed with your frankness and realness about the going ons about us. After reading #272, Dec 15, 2002 issue, some articles about prisons, I'd like to share some experiences I've had while here at this Corcoran facility with you.
I am currently in Administrative Segregation. On March 2, 2002 a riot broke out on A facility between two Latino groups (Southern Mexicans and Bulldogs) where 3 inmates were sliced and one was stabbed. A 30 day lock down was put into effect, but no interviews were conducted of inmates from these two groups. When an incident of this nature happened before with two groups (Nortenos and Bulldogs) the smaller of the two groups was moved to another yard and the institution has kept these two groups apart. As should be done legally. This time the groups were not separated, no parley was attempted, and no placement of any inmates in ad seg pending transfer.
After the 30 days, on 4-3-02 both groups were let out. Partial Bulldogs from "one" building and all Southern Hispanics from "one" building. Another riot took place. The administration had all extra staff there in riot gear, face shields, extra flex (plastic) handcuffs, elbow pads, staff from all general population, ad. seg staff, escorting staff, ISU (Institutional Services Unit) MTAs (Medical Technical Assistant). In front of the A-Facility office the personnel who hold classification were there, correctional counselors, Lt. Diaz, they were just grouped up, waiting , watching, for something to happen. All they needed were lawn chairs and some popcorn. A video camera was manned by a CO on top of the gym which recorded the riot.
All of this was and is illegal for administration to set this type of incident up and let it go down, with full knowledge, being aware that a substantial risk of serious harm was present to the inmates from each other.
I was given a SHU term of 4 months for "Participation in a riot" which was completed back in June of 2002 but I am still being retained in Ad. Seg. The first Rule Violation Report (RVR) 115 was reheard because I was not allowed to view the video. The second same 115 is being reissued reheard because of another due process violation. When I went to have the second 115 heard I was not given my copy of the Investigative Employee report which is supposed to be given 24 hours prior to the hearing. At the hearing I let the hearing officer Lt. Miller know this that I did not want the 115 heard yet until I could review the document but Lt. Miller didn't care and found me guilty anyway, another due process violation.
Here I sit in ad seg 10 months waiting to be issued an RVR 115 and have it heard. When normally this process takes 30 days. I have 602 appealed the write up, I have stated case law in it. Administrators can not just let violence take its course and then have a front row seat and watch. No that's not legal. I have also appealed the due process violations.
This place is so corrupt I wish others would let it be known about conditions in the prisons they're in.
-- a prisoner in California, CSP Corcoran, February 2003