WHAT EXACTLY DOES VIRGINIA CODE TITLE 53.1-39 CERTAIN PUNISHMENT OF PRISONERS PROHIBITED, MEAN? By William Thorpe

Pictures are taken from the internet and are used for illustrative purposes only

VIRGINIA CODE TITLE 53.1-39---CERTAIN PUNISHMENT OF PRISONERS PROHIBITED [it states] "NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF THIS CODE OR ANY OTHER LAW, RULE OR REGULATION TO THE CONTRARY, IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR THE DIRECTOR, THE BOARD, OR ANY OTHER CORRECTIONAL AUTHORITY HAVING THE CARE, CUSTODY, OR CONTROL OF ANY PRISONER IN THIS COMMONWEALTH TO MAKE OR ENFORCE ANY RULE OR REGULATION PROVIDING FOR THE WHIPPING, FLOGGING, OR ADMINISTRATION OF ANY SIMILAR CORPORAL PUNISHMENT OF ANY PRISONER OR TO GIVE ANY SPECIFIC ORDER FOR OR TO CAUSE TO BE ADMINISTERED OR PERSONALLY TO ADMINISTER OR INFLICT ANY SUCH CORPORAL PUNISHMENT"-----Then the Virginia Prison Official after reading, studying and receiving what they term and consider as guidance from the Office of The Attorney General of Virginia on the meaning of and on how to implement the law, promptly begins to violate it in principle and in practice. Give me a moment and I'll show what I mean, right after I quote how BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY defines "CORPORAL PUNISHMENT" [as] "PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT PUNISHMENT THAT IS INFLICTED UPON THE BODY (INCLUDING IMPRISONMENT)".This proscription and prohibition against Corporal Punishment has been a Virginia law for a while. What normally happens is Legislators or the Politicians construct the Law, the Governor signs it and then it exists under Due Process. Meaning, as it relates to the law in question a Virginia prisoner goes to court claiming the Virginia prison official in violation of 53.1-39,has subjected him or her to corporal punishment. The Virginia prison official represented by the Attorney General of Virginia denies any violation has occurred and the Judge sides with the prison official and tosses or dismisses the claim. Meaning the Virginia prison official returns to the prison and keeps on doing whatever they were doing that compelled the prisoner to file the claim. But here is the reality, the Virginia Prisoner still suffered and endured the state and condition of something physical. So instead of tying the Virginia prisoner to a whipping post or placing the prisoner in a stockade, which would evoke that colloquial description of "corporal punishment", firstly the Virginia prison official, refuses to characterize a condition the prisoner is subjected to as punishment and that in itself is that original permeating corrupting general rot or canker of the Virginia prison official's "Thought", because the entire condition and circumstance of imprisonment, is "punishment". Then the Virginia prison official begins to subject the prisoner to all sorts of punishing pain inducing and causing methods, for a classic example of this [see this case] BURKE v. STANLEY YOUNG 2024 Va. App. LEXIS 550 [the Virginia prisoner, Burke, who was already suffering from a number of degenerative and congenital diseases, was according to Court records "hog tied "]. Virginia Federal and State Courts are full of all sorts of accounts of "corporal punishments", meted to Virginia prisoners in direct contradiction and violation of Virginia code 53.1-39. [See these cases FOBBS v. HUNT 2021 U.S.DIST.LEXIS 87094 BAILEY v. TURNER 736 F.2d 963(and Sherardize this particular case).Violations also occur with that wink and nod by Judges and Governmental Officials who deliberately weaponize euphemisms in support and defense of that which corporal punishment does yet 53.1-39 proscribes and prohibits. The reality of this is: the Virginia prisoner, family and friends experience the impunity and disregard of the law as nothing less than a tyrannical imposition.

By William Thorpe

I'm William Thorpe Virginia exiled me to the Texas prison system. I'm solitary confined at the Wainwright Unit and if you feel any kinda way about this work contact me by Securus email using the Texas prison number #2261982