Meals, Mail and More

Do you ever ask yourself “why do six out of ten released offenders land back in prison within three years?”  Sure, some are bad seeds who will continue to do that which landed them in here.  Many, however, should conjure up thoughts in your mind of “there but for the grace of God go I.”  Funny, I used to pooh pooh that expression.  After all, I was “never” one check away from poverty, divorce, prison.  Don’t think God has a sense of humor?  Take one look at me.  I’m a walking comedy routine; I am a platypus.  More about that later.  No, as I wander through this institution I see almost daily how so much of DOC is staffed – in senior positions – by men and women who cause more problems than contribute to solutions.  And, a very real part of the high recidivism rate can be set on their table.  You treat people disrespectfully, you lie to them, you try bizarre social engineering, and you wonder why there isn’t a corrections epiphany.  As “Pogo” said, “we have met the enemy and he is us.”

A week ago our assistant warden announced a change in meal schedules.  For ten years “common fare” participants (i.e. religious diets) have eaten first.  As I’ve documented over the life of this blog, the battle over religious rights – including religious meals – has been fought for years behind the walls.  Numerous Federal court opinions have held that an inmate in prison retains his/her right to practice their faith and if that faith requires certain dietary rules to be observed (i.e. Kosher for Jewish inmates) then those diets must be reasonably accommodated.

Virginia DOC for years fought giving special diet trays.  By fits and starts, DOC relented in the face of dozens of First Amendment suits (how ironic, all the “law and order” types seek to fight application of Constitutional rights to prisoners where the Constitution is the “ultimate” law of the land) and “common fare” was instituted.  Rather than looking at each inmate’s religious practice on a case by case basis (Federal Courts have approved an objective test:  does the inmate present a faith based petition for special diet?), Virginia set up a one size fits all approach.  Attend any approved church/religious service twice a month for six months, then you are eligible for common fare.

Hundreds of guys signed up after joining Messianic Jewish services, Jehovah Witnesses, Rastafarians, Nation of Islam, or traditional Christian or Muslim services.  And that’s where the rub hits.  It costs DOC approximately $1.75 per day to feed the average inmate.  It costs over three time that much to feed common fare.  In an age where state budgets are stretched and still Virginia politicians won’t admit the obvious truth – there are too many people incarcerated for too long – common fare trays cost too much to provide.

Enter the Assistant Warden.  He announces common fare participants will eat last at breakfast and dinner and go at 11:00 am for lunch (before count).  His rationale, told to officers and teachers “I just want to shake things up and see what comes out”.  He wants guys to quit common fare and the effects his “shake up” have on programs are irrelevant if he gets his desired result.

What effects?  Glad you asked.  Factory workers cannot go to the shop to make chairs that are sold at above value prices to state agencies to help pay for DOC (the costs of which are borne by the taxpayers) until after chow call. That’s an hour and a half later than usual, a tremendous loss of productivity (not to mention pay for the guys).

Then there’s school.  Because of the early lunch call, common fare participants in 2^nd period (and aides) leave thirty minutes early.  That’s 2 ½ hours lost each week out of 7 ½ hours of school time per student.  How odd, I thought.  Education is the number one way to break the cycle of recidivism and this administration has taken 1/3 of an inmate’s weekly school time and flushed it.

The same happens at 5^th period school (4:30 to 7:30).  Common fare participants cannot go to school until after chow (5:30).  5^th period classes meet twice a week, so two out of six hours are lost.

Did the Assistant Warden think this out?  I like to think he’s just foolish.  However, my experience in here has taught me guys like the Assistant Warden are dangerous.  Power goes to their heads.  They see the prison as their private fiefdom or lab and they make rash decisions without consulting the people on the front lines, like the teachers.  The fact that their decisions run contrary to the Governor’s re-entry speak apparently doesn’t matter.

Then there’s prison mail.  DOC has a host of rules governing inmate mail.  Letters must weigh less than one ounce; there can be no “contraband” (an ambiguous word, contraband is defined as anything not approved for an inmate).  An especially touchy subject involves photos.  “No nude, semi-nude, lingerie photos allowed.”  So your 80 year old grandparents send you a picture taken of them walking on the beach in bathing suits?  Disallowed.  Yet, inmates can order 5 X 7 photo cards of totally nude women from “pen pal” catalogs.

I don’t disagree with all of DOC’s mail rules.  They’re an inconvenience but heck, we’re in prison.  The problem is the individual decision making is left to the discretion of each prison’s operations officer.  And that is the rub.

The other day Craig was denied a letter (when mail is rejected we receive a form letter notifying us of the “ground” for rejection) based on “lingerie photos”.  Craig’s girlfriend was going to a concert and had a friend snap a photo of her in jeans, cowboy boots, and a red silk top.  Not only was the photo rejected, but a large “X” was written through it and the letter and photo then torn and returned to her.  On the outside of the envelope a DOC ink stamp noted “letter returned…nude photos”.

Craig’s girlfriend was furious.  She called here and spoke to the operations officer who told her the photo was disallowed because “silk blouses are lingerie”.  Want to hear something funny?  The operations officer – a mid-forties African American woman – wears silk blouses almost every day.  The issue hasn’t been dropped.  Craig’s girlfriend contacted an attorney and called the Director’s office.

The problem is each prison interprets this rule.  Subjective decision-making is never good, especially when the subjective basis set out is illogical.  As the same time this battle was playing out the Washington Post was reporting on DOC’s “televisit” set-up in Alexandria allowing Northern Virginia families to visit, via video connection, with their family members in the far Southwest (eight to ten hours from Alexandria).  “A sense of family is critical to an inmate’s successful reintegration into society” a researcher was quoted as saying.

So, why does DOC allow its prison to interfere with communications from family and friends in such arbitrary ways?  Why, if we know that connection to the real world leads to successful reintegration, does DOC tolerate such behavior in their prison administrators?

Again, I fear the answer isn’t ignorance, it’s darker.  Fewer inmates require fewer prisons.  Fewer prisons mean fewer guards, fewer operations directors, fewer wardens.  Prison operations are a $70 billion industry and all that money is from public funds.  I’m not a conspiracy proponent, but when National Review writers such as Jonah Goldberg, in a recent column about California’s corrupt and dysfunctional (and unconstitutional) prison system say the following:  “in a state where more than two-thirds of crime is attributable to recidivism [CA DOC’s officers union) has spent millions of dollars lobbying against rehabilitation programs, favoring instead policies that will grow the inmate population and the ranks of prison guards…”  Kind of makes me think my conspiracy thoughts aren’t too farfetched.

“There but for the grace of God go I.”  I opened this blog using that expression.  Funny thing about grace.  It usually shows up in the most difficult of circumstances.  As I sit here and watch the immovable object – “tough on crime” – come face to face with the economic realities of 9% unemployment, European market melt downs, a political season filled with hollow promises, I realize God has me exactly where I need to be.  Things are becoming clear to me about this states, this nations, failed criminal justice system.  God’s grace, you see, even finds its way into the prisons.

Another DOC Week

Time moves on.  Days roll into other days.  The world goes on and so does DOC.  This past week the Virginia Attorney General announced settlement was reached with a Muslim inmate at Greensville (a high level 2 and a low level 3 facility) to allow him to receive Islamic CDs.  For seven years this inmate fought DOC for the right to receive audio discs of Islamic services.  He continued to win and DOC continued to balk until finally, after expending thousands of taxpayer dollars defending an indefensible position, they settled and agreed to reimburse him for all his costs.  As I’ve written in here before, you take a man’s freedom and you force him to think, really think about everything.  And thinking can be dangerous.  Guys figure out novel ways to challenge the system.

Society wants to lock people up; that’s their prerogative.  But there is still a little document called the United States Constitution and little words like “due process” that dictate how government can treat people.  And those rights don’t all cease when you are incarcerated.  I never stop being amazed by the people that will wave the flag and tell you how great this country is, but forget the founding fathers were deeply suspicious of over-reaching governmental power.  And no power is more dangerous than the power to arrest and imprison a person.

DOC would rather fight inmate suits than admit their policy is arbitrary and bears no legitimate relation to security of the facility.  As I’ve written before, DOC has a sweetheart contract signed with Jones Express Music (JEM) that requires all CDs purchased by inmates to be purchased (1) through the inmate’s account and (2) from JEM.  The Muslim inmate has now won a battle against the JEM exclusivity arrangement (they don’t carry spoken word CDs or foreign language CDs or religious CDs).

This week, a relative sent me a CD from Barnes & Noble.  “Barenaked Ladies Live”.  Property advised me I couldn’t have the CD.  That afternoon, I filed a grievance challenging the department’s CD purchasing policy.  It’s a fight I’m willing to bring.  BNL tunes hit me emotionally.

Try this from their song “Adrift” about a broken relationship:

            Ever since we said our goodbyes

            The onion rings, the phone makes me cry
            Something isn’t right
            Like the Deep Blue without the Great White.

            In the morning open your eyes

            The waterfalls, the fire flies
            You’re an abacus
            And my heart was counting on us.

            Crescent moon sings me to sleep

            The birches bark, the willows weep
            But I lie awake
            I’m adrift without a snowflake.

Per instructions from DOC, disciplinary rule III (“stealing”) now includes inmates re-moving food from their own trays to take back to the building (this is to prevent fresh fruit and vegetables finding their way into inmate meals in the building).  This has always been treated as a 200 series contraband charge.  100 series charges lead to raised security level (meaning you are moved from a level 2 to a level 3 prison) and loss of good time. With a series 200 charge, an inmate who has never been in trouble before can receive an “informal resolution”, meaning a letter goes to your file.  Six months charge free and the letter is removed from your file.

But here at Lunenburg, the new Assistant Warden has decreed that informal resolutions can no longer be used even though they are a part of the DOC disciplinary process.  More significantly, he has decided to not consider charge reductions on appeal.  What does that mean?

Todd is a 28 year old white Jewish kid finishing an eight year sentence in 2012 for drug distribution.  He gets Kosher meals which include onions.  For his entire bid he has never had a charge.  Three weeks ago, he attempted to sneak his onion out of the chow hall to use in a Passover meal he was preparing with two other Jewish inmates.  He was caught and turned the onion over.  Todd was cited with a III and convicted.  His punishment?  A written reprimand.  Here’s the problem.  Three days before Todd’s incident, six black inmates were also charged and convicted of III violations.  They all appealed to the warden who promptly reduced the charge to a 224.

Todd appealed to the warden who rejected his request for a reduction.  “You know the rules”, was the basis for the denial.  So, Todd now faces transfer and loss of nine months of good time.

I filed an appeal for him and raised race and religion grounds.  The simple fact of the matter is the warden treated black and Muslim inmates differently.  If the prison wants to enforce this rule, the inmates can’t complain.  It’s in the disciplinary handbook.  But that doesn’t mean the rule can be enforced selectively.

Finally, there’s the story of “Zippy”.  I won’t use his real name to protect him from further embarrassment, but one of our “distinguished” college aides was tucking his shirt in his pants the other day at work when he hit a snag.

Craig and I looked over to see him doubled over.  “I’m hooked”, he kept saying.  And hooked he was.  He had to walk to medical, doubled over and climb on a gurney while the horse doctor and a cute nurse gave him an injection to numb the area and remove the zipper from the non-named portion of his anatomy.

Once he returned, standing erect (no pun intended) we named him “Zippy”.  Funny, but without telling the nursing staff they came up with the same name.  It makes a great story:  “so how’d you get your prison handle Zippy?”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A final, non-DOC thought –

            In the past few weeks I’ve been asked by guys in here and family outside, about my capacity to remember minute details of events in my life:  meals, outfits my ex wore, words spoken.  It’s something I’ve always been able to do.  But, this week, reading a book about a writer’s marriage, I came across an amazing quote by the Roman poet Ovid that helps explain it”

“Parsque est meminissee doloris.”

“It’s part of grief to remember.”