Turning A Blind Eye To Prison Official Malfeasance In The Fourth Circuit

This past spring we at VAPAC called on the preeminent schools of law of universities within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in holding prison officials within the circuit accountable

The University of Virginia recently announced that starting in the spring of 2022 it will present a project for informed reform that will permit students, scholars and experts to "conduct extensive research and investigation on issues related to criminal justice, and then generate evidence-based data to help inform and assist litigation, legal scholarship and public policy."

Despite the fact that we welcome the University of Virginia's response we state that it is inadequate in its scope, formulations, and grasp of this present stage of the justice system and it's exposed contradictions. Without going all into a comprehensive scrutiny of UVA's anticipation we can't help but notice glaring omissions       Where are the prisoner, where are the prisoner families, where are the victims of alleged crimes of the prisoner, and their experiential perspective which is germane to justice reform and accountability?

Prison and the imprisonment is that reality of the social - contract laid naked as a specific set of contradictions on a reactionary bed of suppositions and to speak of evidence-based data undermines any intent of holding the state via the prison official accountable.

Prison official's malfeasance does not exist in itself, it has a for itself mechanics of preying on the prisoner. It has a locus that corruption dynamic of the prison official operating above the law, reanimating all that is regressive in human relations, the same regressive human activity that on one level creates the prisoner.

We at VAPAC stand against and oppose that idealistic narrative. That wink and a nod apology for extrajudicial viz unlawful behavior of the prison official that the sadism and barbarity of the behavior is beyond reproach and not pathologically deviant.

What we do understand is prison official malfeasance exists because society and in particular institutions of schools of law have turned a blind eye to it.

• University of Virginia School of Law
• University of North Carolina School of Law
• University of South Carolina School of Law
• West Virginia University College of Law
• College of William and Mary School of Law
• Clemson University School of Law
• Duke University School of Law

vapac

If Parole Is Real Then It Must Be Given Or Denied On Real Basis Or Be Exposed

By vapac
 

Exposing The Bureaucratic and Administrative Process of Virginias Parole System and It's A Crap Shoot

Rarely do we get to see the bureaucratic and administrative process of Virginia's parole system under authority of Virginia code section 53.1-134 through 53.1-165.1

However, VAPAC has been given that privilege by copy of a prisoner's denial of parole letter. For obvious confidentiality purposes, the identity is protected.

VAPAC has numerous issues, questions and problems with this revelation of the parole process. The obvious being there isn't a evidence based on grounds for parole besides speculations by those with the authority to grant parole. Yet as this denial of parole letter and its verbiage reveal, the parole board is behaving as if there is.

What we at VAPAC ask is should parole and the redemption and justice it allows society be a crap shoot or poker bluff?

As we see in this specific parole denial and its reasons given: History of violence, crimes committed, conviction of a new crime while incarcerated, serious nature and circumstances of your offense(s)

All are facts of the prisoner's circumstances and cannot be changed, only contextualized. Which is what if the Virginia Parole Board had any modicum of understanding of what is the social contract. It would perform its duty by. Because whatever a history of violence means within analysis of the Virginia imprisonment experiment it cannot be changed. Crimes committed, conviction of new crime and serious nature and circumstances of crimes cannot be changed      So what practical and justifiable determinations is the parole board speaking of making relative to a "compatibility with public safety, the mutual interest of society, character, conduct, reflecting the probability of leading a law-abiding life"?

What the parole board however is exposing is its indulgence in petty sophistry, an end run of denial under the leopard has spots logic and because it has spots which cannot be changed      Therefore parole is denied      Why then are we the tax payers funding a parole board, to simply tell us a prisoner is imprisoned due to a conviction?

We at VAPAC and also as tax payers state: The parole system is crap shooting with lives of citizens imprisoned      If parole is an anticipation of Virginia's prison experiment then it must be granted or denied on practical basis or stand exposed as a specious gambit, another insidious exercise of side door, get out of jail for the privileged for whom the justice experience and imprisonment experiment is afforded context.

There must be transparency and accountability in the system.

Lets educate ourselves.

By vapac

Virginia Prison Visitation Unvaccinated Isolation Verses Vaccinated By Jarmaine Spruill

 "The Virginia Department of Corrections encourages inmate visitation that promotes family reunification, positive pro-social change, and a reduction in recidivism the support of public safety to extend an existing healing environment offering inmates visitation." However, key information has been given per Memorandum which restricts me (unvaccinated) from the opportunities of family reunification by not allowing me to have In-Person visitation. I am in fact General Population abiding by all institutional rules and regulations, as this benefit impacts us all for equal access to programs, services, work assignments, In- Person Visitation etc.

Sincerely held, taking all precautions serious to protect myself and others I voluntarily undergo "Special" Covid-19 Antigen-Screenings every 7 days which is a mandatory participation for all unvaccinated inmates. This self- administered nasal swab test yields results within 15 minutes. The same protocol is initiated for any inmates whose job in tells them to work outside of the perimeter of the prison for the sole purpose of them coming in close contact with staff personnel. These workers undergo the same "Special" safety considerations, performing their job duties following a negative result is the same protocol as the Antigen self administered nasal swab test that I am required to take because of my unvaccinated status.

In-Person visitation is the vital mechanism which is conducive for ones own sanity for sense of being. Preventing me (unvaccinated) of these opportunities to bond with my family during the reopening of In-Person visitation is discriminatory. I am not in segregation and further more, I have done nothing to lose my In-Person visitation privileges. The same protocol can be utilized for In-Person visitation, just as if it were job related. Me not being vaccinated does not interfere with the activities of living in General Population especially now that they've devised a system seeing that I (unvaccinated) get tested frequently. Following thus safety protocol adhering to practices of self- administered nasal swab testing, it is only being utilized for circumstantial protections which makes this a case of negligence of treatment, retaliation, and discrimination showing a substantial system of deliberate indifference towards unvaccinated inmates. Why should I continue to comply in the self- administered nasal swab test when I'm being retaliated and discriminated against, while this same self- administered nasal swab test is bias, when it should grant me (unvaccinated) admission following a negative result as a precautionary measure like every other scenario?

By  Jarmaine Spruill 

Prison Accountability and Transparency

vapac