🔥ACTIONS NEEDED🔥 THERE IS CONCERN FOR TWO VIRGINIA SUSSEX 1 STATE PRISONERS KELLEY & GARRETT

There is concern about Michael Kelley #1190718 and Curtis Garrett #1546886, who are in solitary confinement at Sussex I State Prison.  
DETAILS:

Michael Kelley #1190718 was transferred from Red Onion to Sussex I State Prison in October 2017 and has been in solitary confinement ("restrictive housing") since then.  The reason for his transfer was ostensibly so that he could receive medical treatment at VCU.  He told IAHR that he was nearing completion of the Step-Down Program immediately before his transfer, but his participation in the program was suspended when he was transferred.  He has not been provided with a pathway toward release from isolation at Sussex I.  He has had a few medical appointments at VCU, but each appointment is followed by long delays until the next appointment.  His access to phones and electronic media is extremely limited, and he reports that his isolation at Sussex I has been even more stressful than at Red Onion.

Curtis Garrett #1546886 is in a reentry unit at Sussex I and is due to be released from prison in June of this year.  His family reports that on Christmas Day, a prisoner started walking around the pod and swinging a broom handle at people.  As Curtis and others tried to stop him, officers came in with dogs.  Immediately, as instructed, Curtis and the other prisoners lay on the floor as the dogs came close.  Frightened and eager to get away from the dogs, Curtis got up, ran into his cell, and closed his cell door.  Officers with dogs pursued him, entered Curtis' cell and told the dogs to attack.  Curtis was bitten by the dogs as officers allegedly beat him.

Curtis was taken to Southside Regional Medical Center for treatment.  He suffered serious wounds and nerve damage in his left arm and leg.  When Curtis returned to Sussex I, he was put in solitary confinement.  At an initial meeting with the warden and assistant warden on Wednesday, January 2, his mother was told that they had reviewed the security footage of the incident and that it showed Curtis was not at fault in the melee but he should not have run back to his cell.  Nevertheless, they said the reason Curtis was in solitary was that there is a pending investigation of the incident, and he would have to stay there until the investigation is completed.  No one has been able to tell Curtis or his family how long the investigation is likely to last.  No investigator had talked to Curtis as of January 12.  His family's attempts to communicate with the warden or assistant warden since this meeting have been unsuccessful.  They are asking for Curtis to be transferred to another facility where his injuries can be treated effectively and where he will not be in solitary confinement ("restrictive housing").

Curtis' mother visited him on January 2 and January 9.  Both times he was wheeled to the visit in a wheelchair.  During the first visit, she reported that he was in a panic mode, clearly traumatized by the dog attack and continually reliving it.  During the second visit, a week later, he was physically and mentally drained.  He looked weak and dehydrated and had trouble articulating his feelings.  She also noticed that blood was soaking through his bandages.  A nurse herself, she reported that the hospital had directed that his dressings be changed every day, but the medical unit at Sussex I decided that they only needed to be changed every other day.  We are concerned about the quality of the medical care he is receiving.

Your action is needed,  "vapac" in alliance with Gay Gardner & Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) on these issues ask you to contact the below DOC officials, urging them to remove these men from solitary confinement/"restrictive housing" and transfer them to a setting where they can receive effective medical treatment without damage to their mental health.

Israel Hamilton, Warden, Sussex I State Prison

Israel.hamilton@vadoc.virginia.gov

804-834-9967

William Jarratt, Assistant Warden, Sussex I State Prison

William.jarratt@vadoc.virginia.gov

804-834-9967

Harold Clarke, Director of Corrections

Harold.clarke@vadoc.virginia.gov

804-674-3000

A. David Robinson, Chief of Corrections Operations

David.robinson@vadoc.virginia.gov

804-674-3000

Steve Herrick, Director of Health Services

Steve.herrick@vadoc.virginia.gov

804-887-8118

Via Gay Gardner & Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) &

Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee

Governor Ralph Northam's 2019 State of the Commonwealth Address Announces Virginia Maintains the Lowest Recidivism Rate in the Country, Now Virginians Do This!

NOW VADOC HAROLD CLARKE LET'S ABOLISH THE BARBARIC USE OF SOLITARY CONFINEMENT IN VIRGINIA PRISONS!!!

WHEN NOTED "EXPRESS INDIFFERENCE": RED ONION STATE PRISON, MENTAL HEALTH and IT'S PRACTICE OF SOLITARY CONFINEMENT

As early as 1890: the U.S. Supreme Court in the case: In Re Medley, 134 US 160 [1890] dealing with Solitary Confinement or as it's currently nuanced euphemistically Administrative Segregation wrote:

"A considerable number of the Prisoners fell after even a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous condition from which it was next to impossible to arouse them, and other became violently insane; others, still, committed suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better were not generally reformed, and in most cases, did not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the community."

That 1890 court concluded that Solitary Confinement is "an infamous punishment"

In 1988; The Seventh Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeals determined in Davenport v. Derobertis 844 F.2.d 1310: 

"That isolating a Human Being from other Human Beings year after year or even month after month can cause substantial psychological damage, even if the isolation isn't total".

The court went on to state "there is plenty of medical and psychological literature concerning the ill effects of Solitary Confinement [of which Segregation is a variant]

In 1995; The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in Madrid v. Gomez 889 f.supp.1146 [A case so comprehensive in it's finding that the state of California didn't even bother to appeal] wrote:

   "Subjecting individuals to conditions [Solitary Confinement] that are "very likely" to render them psychotic or otherwise exacerbate a serious Mental Illness cannot be squared with evolving standards of humanity and decency, especially when certain aspects of those conditions appear to bear little relation to security concerns. A risk this grave      this shocking and indecent----simply has no place in civilized society".

In 2003 Human Rights Watch quoted a California Prison Psychiatrist in Human Rights Watch, Ill-equipped: U.S. prisons and offenders with Mental Illness 149-513 saying: "It's a standard psychiatric concept, if you put people in isolation [Solitary Confinement] they will go insane.......
most people in isolation will fall apart".

In 2005: in a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, Wilkinson v.Austin #04-495, also 545 U.S. 209.  A group of Psychologists and Psychiatrists filed a Amicus Curiae or Friend of the Court brief in support of Prisoners stating:

No Study of the effects of Solitary or Supermax-Like confinement that lasted longer than 60 days failed to find evidence of negative psychological effects".

Recently the fourth Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeals which has Jurisdiction over the Commonwealth of Virginia and four other states determined in the 2015 case, Incumaa v. Stirling 791 f.3d 517 [2015] that:

"[Prisoner] had liberty interest in avoiding Solitary Confinement in security detention, as required for his claim that his placement in Solitary for 20 years violated [U.S.] Fourteenth Amendment Procedural Due Process: [Prisoner] was subject to near daily cavity and strip searches, he was confined to small cell for all sleeping and waking hours aside from 10 hours of activity outside the cell per month, he was denied educational, vocational, and therapy programs, [Prisoner] was socially isolated, and confinement was indefinite."

In light of the above cited, quoted and excerpted authorities which are but a sample of the exhaustively comprehensive legal and Mental Health findings and works on practice of using Long Term Administrative Segregation or Solitary Confinement, of which contrary to recent noises by the Virginia Politicos and officials at it's flagship primary Solitary Confinement Prison, Red Onion State Prison [ROSP] that Solitary Confinement in VADOC has been reformed and done away with.

The practice of Long Term Solitary Confinement is alive and well and ongoing at ROSP, where a number of Prisoners have been detained in Solitary Confinement for over 20 years and counting of which I am one, experiencing identical conditions as the Prisoner in the Incumaa case, since 1996.

It is to the above-referenced works as back drop, that the Mental Health Department of ROSP, a Prison where Solitary Confinement is the Primary Form of detention. Gave the terse response "NOTED" in it's professional capacity to my question on:

"What is the current contemporary consensus from Mental Health Professionals on Psychological and physiological effects of Long term Solitary Confinement or Administrative Segregation".  [see response from ROSP Mental Health Department: "NOTED".

What is to be made of the situation where ROSP officials are indifferent and unwilling to recognize that a practice of detention utilized as their Primary Operational Model----Solitary Confinement is distinguished by negative critique extending over a hundred years?

By William Thorpe

William Thorpe is detained at ROSP in Solitary Confinement since 1998 

Related Articles & Links:

1. Commonwealth of Virginia - Department of Corrections - Percentage of Virginia Inmates in Restrictive Housing Among the Lowest in the Nation http://bit.ly/2hfYJBy
2. "NOTED" : ROSP Mental Health Response
3. Prison Mental Health Care lawsuit proceeds as Class Action Lawsuit
4. An update the following is the second response to ROSP Mental Health question.(click Sentence) Response: I am unable to answer your question. 

Correctional Staffs Disregard for life & Warnings Ignored With Cell Incompatibility Leads To Lethal Consequences At Virginia Sussex 1 State Prison

IS A PRISONER WRONG FOR DEFENDING HIMSELF WHEN THE VADOC WOULDN'T?

Reference: Everett Byrd #1632329
Cell incompatibility

*UPDATE*

December 19, 2018

Negligence of Sussex 1 State Prison 

I was housed in 2A27, with a man who was completely incompatible with me. We went to all the people with power asking to be separated. We filed paperwork and did face to face begging.

I pointed out the facts to Staff ~ say we were incompatible. Age, Race, time are [is] the main grounds! They were ignored. I told Sgt. Evans, I feared for my life her response was "go to the cell."

On January 11, 2018 My celli and I got physical and the altercation ended tragically! No weapons were used!

The [Virginia] Department of Corrections failed yet again to protect and serve leading to the death of yet another man! And putting the other on long-term segregation [Solitary Confienment]

Am I wrong for defending myself when DOC wouldn't?

Everett Byrd 

22years old

Dear People:
Please be informed this is another case of Institutional Staff unprofessional behavior that has resulted in another inmate losing his life and another one, the one referenced may end up with a charge of murder.

As this inmate explains he was put in a cell mistakenly and was promised he would be moved. He was not and after being in the cell a few days the problems started between him and his celli. He did many things to halt the coming altercation but no one helped him. He spoke with Lieutenants and other staff asking them all to move him out. He called home and spoke with his grandmother about it. He even got other inmates to sign a written petition detailing his need to be removed from the cell and they didn't pay him any attention.

After he and his celli began to fight at least two officers were on another pod and knew they were fighting and did not come to stop it. Inmate Byrd says they fought for 2 hours without a weapon and yet after the fight the other inmate later died.

This is a very tragic matter and the Staff is to blame for the inmate's death. They should be terminated. Someone besides inmate Byrd should be held responsible and should receive all repercussions.
Shaheed Omar

Click on arrows icon to read the entire PDF file ↓↓↓↓↓

*UPDATE* Everett has since been transferred to Red Onion State Prison

Everett Byrd is imprisoned in Virginia's prison system, serving his sentence at this time in Red Onion State Prison Write to him and show him support. His address is: 

Everett Byrd #1632329

Red Onion StatePrison

P.O. Box 1900

Pound, Virginia 24279

By Everett Byrd & In Collaboration with Shaheed Omar

Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee

PRACTICE OF STARVING VIRGINIA PRISONERS BY i.e RED ONION STATE PRISON, CATHOLIC USE OF SOLITARY CONFINEMENT and OTHER EXTRA-JUDICIAL PRACTICES CONTRIBUTE TO PRISONERS CHRONIC MEDICAL CONDITIONS BY WILLIAM THORPE

If the General Assembly's Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission is concerned with the rising cost of medical care for prisoners the within Virginia Prison system and it's Department of Corrections then the primary locus and orientation should be on prevention, styming causes that are within the Virginia Department of Corrections control, which the department already has a constitutional obligation to do. Under the United States Constitution 8th Amendment and Virginia Constitution Article 1 section 9 prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

" The Eighth Amendment prohibits the infliction of "cruel and unusual punishment," U.S. Const. Amend. VIII, this prohibition proscribes more than physical barbarous punishment. It also encompasses the treatment a prisoner receives in prison and the conditions under which he is confined. In particular, the Eighth Amendment imposes a duty on prison officials to provide humane conditions of confinement and ensure that inmates receive adequate food, clothing, shelter and medical care."  

See Estelle v. Gamble 429 U.S. 97 [1993] 

Helling v. McKinney 509 U.S. 25 [1993]

Farmer v. Brennan 511 U.S. 825 [1994]

Starving prisoners, Use of Solitary Confinement are also causes of prisoner chronic medical conditions.

A recent report by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission presents an idealistic and one-dimensional conclusion that totally ignores that the very nature of how the Virginia Department of Corrections performs its duties, practically unaccountable to the Virginia taxpayer is a primary cause of chronic health issues among the prisoner population.

So for starters, if the food service departments of the various prisons i.e. Red Onion State Prison would obey the U.S. Constitution 8th Amend. requirement of providing prisoners with adequate food and comply with the Departments Master Menu and its provisions and stop starving prisoners, by using food as an ad-hoc extrajudicial punishment. Prisoners would be relatively healthy enough with a fortified immune system to resist levels of ailments that are currently precipitating and necessitating, heightened medical care of Virginia prisoners and its costs. 

Secondly, medicine has long determined that stress causes trauma which induces all sorts of chronic and extreme medical conditions and health problems and what is more stressful than the solitary confinement aspect of prison? Yes, despite this medical fact which the Virginia Prison officials have the professional responsibility and constitutional obligation of knowing and not violating.

The Virginia prison officials i.e. The Red Onion State Prison official has reduced the metric of their administration philosophy and its practice to crude but novel ways of confining prisoners in solitary despite contrary assertions and espousals of reform of the practice. So prisoners at Red Onion State Prison are confined in solitary, in conditions that cause hypertension, cardiac disease, atrophication, respiratory conditions due to the indiscriminate and violative use of OC Gas and spray inside the closed confines of cells.

"it has long been established that prison officials violate the Eighth Amendment by using "mace, tear gas or other chemical agents in quantities greater than necessary or for the sole purpose of infliction of pain."

See: Williams v. Benjamin 77 F. 33d 756 [4th Cir. 1996]

Thirdly, if the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission finds the Department of Corrections mental health care prohibitive. A more practical and objective finding would have been, that the totality of practices of prisons i.e. Red Onion State Prison is contributive to the prevalence of chronic medical conditions and mental health issues among the prisoner population. Study in point prisoners is not sentenced to commit suicide in prison. Yet, Red Onion State Prison has had suicides which Virginias Government hasn't for all practical purpose investigated.

So if the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission is being objective and not performing another bureaucratic pro forma study that only highlights a conventional colloquialism. Then it should do what the medical and mental health community have consensus on: Preventative care and that will require a comprehensive critique of the Virginia Department of Corrections philosophy.

William Thorpe is in Solitary Confinement at Red Onion State Prison since 1998

Reference

 JLARC | Spending on Inmate Healthcare