A cesspool of Judicial Corruption

THIRTY-SEVEN dungeons in america

Let’s review the findings from a book entitled, Criminal Injustice (edited by Elihu Rosenblatt–1996), and excerpts taken later in an article by Erica Thompson and Jan Susler entitled, Supermax Prisons, High-Tech Dungeons and Modern-Day Torture:

The SuperMax Control Unit or lockdown concept beginning at Marion, Illinois, in 1963 has been continually criticized by human rights organizations. These concerned individuals argue that it has never been demonstrated that repression brings desired results. SuperMax lockdowns seem to be designed to break the defiant spirit and behavior through psychological deprivation–in which prisoners are stripped of their individual identities.

In a 1987 report of Amnesty International it stated that the Marion method violates the United Nation’s Standard of Minimum Rules for Treatment of Prisoners, that there is hardly a rule in the Standard Minimum Rules that is not infringed in some way or other. Security measures override the individual need for human contact, spiritual fulfillment, and fellowship, and this is the excuse for a constant show of sheer force. Such conditions constitute psychological pain and agony tantamount to torture.

In a 1990 report by a subcommittee of the House of Representatives on courts’ intellectual property and the administration of justice, it expressed concern about the amount of time they cooped up inmates in their cells in relative isolation. They had limited opportunity for production and recreational activities in their cells due to the highly controlled environment, that there is a need to develop a more humane approach to the incarceration of the maximum security prison population.

Since 1983 the Merion model–physical and psychological control–was replaced by the new federal control unit, Colorado ADX. Human rights watch in 1991 found that the single most disturbing aspect of their management was "the trolling for rations of control units prisons." The Report continues:

Inmates are essentially sentenced twice, once by the court to a certain period of imprisonment; and the second time, by the prison administration to confinement in 'maxi'– Max is under extreme harsh conditions and without independent supervision. This second sentence is open ended and limited only by the overall length of an inmate sentence and is meted out without the benefit of counsel. The increasing use of prisons within prisons leads to numerous human rights abuses and frequent violation of the U.N. standard minimum rules for treatment of prisoners.

Super prison control-units differ from lesser security institutions in three principles respects. First other prisoners are out of their cells for an average of 13 hours per day, but Super Prisons are permanent lockdown facilities. In other words prisoners are caged in their single cell approximately 23 hours per day. Prisoners are not allowed to communicate with other prisoners. Complete isolation is assured. Prisoners must eat, sleep, and live their entire lives alone in the cell. No religious service. Censorship of reading materials strict. A person needs human contact. . . .

On the rare occasions when a prisoner has an opportunity to leave his cell, he is fully Shackled (hands, feet and waste), and he is flanked by several guards. "Minor rule infractions result in severe punishment ranging from a prisoner being fully strapped down to his bed to a visit from the cell extracting team."

The legal effect of an administrative transfer is that the prisoner has no legal recourse to challenge the designation. A prisoner can be held indefinitely in Supermax because of that designation. What is going on in United States in the name of law and order is obscene and unprecedented in history. We must educate ourselves, speak out, and take action immediately. We must make a concerted effort to intensify the debate on all fronts. We must be relentless. There are no [valid] excuses."

We ask if ADX complies with The Legal Resource Guide with regards to inmate rights and disciplinary procedures. A thorough investigation may reveal that they don't give inmates reasonable access to legal materials. Federal prisons don't always maintain inmate law libraries, with meaningful books where an inmate may purchase legal materials outside the prison. Even so, the officials may not allow inmates to retain them. They may not allow a reasonable amount of time to conduct their own legal research, to prepare legal documents or retain publications they receive. Violations of prohibited acts do not appear to carry sanctions that correspond to the severity of the events (as relates to segregation, loss of good time, credits, loss of privileges and verbal warnings). Yet, it appears that they will allow retaliatory and capricious disciplinary actions.

On July 21, 2008, I wrote a second letter to Warden Ron Wiley of ADX:

Dear Warden Wiley:

Unfortunately, certain members of your staff have failed to comprehend the significance of their role as agents under your supervision. My last letter to you, dated February 7, 2008 (attached herewith) I asked for your support in making corrections for abuses. Apparently, you did instruct your staff to address the abuses by some guards as mentioned in the attached letter of February 7th. I didn’t make an issue about the abusers. Now I want to tell you what has happened. Again, this is not a formal complaint by asking for a hearing within the system. I’m now publishing a story for all peoples inside and outside the U.S. It may be that only a few people care about what happens to the poor souls that ADX puts in solitary confinement where a few cowardly guards treat inmates with contempt. The abused have no spokesmen.

In the past I have chosen to withhold publishing negatives about ADX because of my believe that most of the guards are decent, honorable employees who want only to do their jobs by following the Regulations as published in the LEGAL RESOURCE GUIDE TO THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS (2008). My intent is to identify and expose those who misunderstand their stewardship. What I did not anticipate was guards or authorities being outright liars. To lie reveals lack of character. A person placed in charge of others needs to be up front and honest, and there is no justification for lying.

On Friday at 1:10 p.m. July 18, 2009, David Hinkson’s attorney, Wes Hoyt, called me saying he had been waiting for 40 minutes to see his client, David (08795-023). He had spoken to CO Quintina (sp) and was told that all the bays were full. Mr. Hoyt called me suggesting I call Officer Sprawl to see if there was any way he could come into an attorney booth [as provided by law], or in the alternative, to one of the eight social booths. I had told Mr. Hoyt about an earlier complaint [I registered] when I was informed by the supervising lieutenant, on duty, "There is no justification for any staff member to delay a visitor for over 30 minutes unless there’s an emergency." In the past, I have myself reminded staff of this declaration, and have gotten hasty results.

At 1:17 p.m., I called asking to speak to Officer Sprawl or Warden Wiley. Mr. Sprawl was cordial and cooperative; he said he’ll try to get Mr. Hoyt in and that he was working on it even as we spoke. So I said, “Thanks for your efforts.”

Shortly after, Mr. Hoyt, who was a former assistant prosecuting attorney, was taken into the cell area. His first observation was that Attorney Booth #12 had no one in it during the remaining hour he was there, and after consulting with other attorneys, he learned that it never had been occupied. No one had left, and no one came in. Attorney Hoyt had emailed and faxed a request to visit David on Tuesday, July 15th [three days earlier]. Officer Sprawl told me that an attorney needs to notify ADX 3 or 4 days before coming. So I told Mr. Sprawl that he could then take one of our family social visits. Officer Sprawl then told me that all eight of the social booths were full. They did, in fact, get him in for an hour visit. At 3:10 p.m. Mr. Hoyt called me telling me that all eight of the social bays had been empty [all along].

At 3:25 p.m., I called ADX and asked to speak to Officer Sprawl. Why did you lie to me,” I asked. He told me that he had been informed that that all the bays/booths were full.

Who told you that?

"Officer Haygood," he said.

"I’ll accept that. But then you were being lied to by Haygood." I tend to believe that Officer Sprawl was telling the truth; I was angry–yet he remained quite cool. Haygood in the past has demonstrated inappropriate behavior toward both David and his attorney, Mr. Hoyt. Possibly he needs to be reminded of the LEGAL RESOURCE GUIDE.

Another issue that raised my ire was the fact that David had notified the ADX authorities two and a half months previously about a tooth hurting him. When his face swelled up and he was agonizing in pain, "Medical" at the Facility gave him a limited amount of penicillin. They did not examine the tooth. I asked Officer Sprawl to put me through to the Medical Department. He started to give me a post office box number. I asked him if someone were hit by a car, "would you send a letter for assistance?" I said I don’t want help in three months or even three hours but now! So he gave me the ADX telephone number [phone]. I let it ring for 30 times before it shut off [automatically] and for another 20 rings before I hung up.

I attached [to the letter] the Appellate Court Decision of May 30, 2008, (Trial held on May 7, 2007) remanding back for retrial David's conviction from Tallman's court.

I said, "Although it is highly unlikely that David Hinkson will remain in the custody of ADX for much longer, all prisoners under your custody should be treated under the guidelines of the stated objective of the Bureau of Prisons. The following is what the BOP wants the public to believe:

The Bureau of Prisons provides services and programs to address inmate needs, structured use of leisure and facilitate the successful reintegration of inmates into society. Each Bureau facility offers a set of programs and services that vary based on the characteristics and needs of its specific inmate population. Upon arrival at a new institution, an inmate is interviewed and screened by staff from the case management, medical, and mental health units. Later, an inmate is assigned to the Admission and Orientation (A&O) Program, where he or she receives a formal orientation to the programs, services, policies, and procedures of that facility. This program provides an introduction to all aspects of the institution.

Research has conclusively demonstrated that participation in a variety of programs that teach marketable skills helps to reduce recidivism. Additionally, institution misconduct can be significantly reduced through programs that emphasize personal responsibility, respect, and tolerance of others.

Accordingly, the BOP offers a wide variety of program opportunities for inmates that teach pro-social values and life skills. These programs include vocational training, the Life Connections Program, parenting programs, and mock job fairs. With regard to the attached MEMORANDUM (dated July 21, 2008), I question if ADX intends to comply with the Guidelines and unequivocal demands as stated. Sincerely, Roland Hinkson

I followed up by calling our Colorado Senator's Office. Senator Allard was by then a lame-duck; he was leaving the Senate. Regardless, I had hoped he could help with David's plight. So I sent the following letter:
Senator Wayne Allard, c/o Brian McCain, August 8, 2008.

Dear Senator Allard: Recently, I spoke to your assistants, Mr. McCain and Mr. Merritt, regarding law violations amounting to abuse of inmates by federal employees at ADMAX, Florence, CO, USBOP. I contacted Warden Wiley, of the U.S. Penitentiary, but he has been unable to correct the abuse of inmate rights which has now proven to be an ongoing stream of misconduct that needs investigation and correction.

I am an investigative reporter for the American’s Bulletin and other publications as well as being a guest on talk shows regarding individual rights. My son, David R. Hinkson, was fraudulently convicted of solicitation of murder of three federal officials (which solicitation never occurred); all the so called evidence was manufactured by a man that has since been convicted of defrauding the V.A. of over $100,000 in benefits using the same false evidence. This man’s fraud was so pathetically flawed that the forged DD-214 he used to claim awards from the Korean War era showed medals that were not created until the 1990s. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed David’s 2005 conviction; however, because of a petition by the Justice Department for en banc review, he continues to sit in ADMAX solitary confinement.

The merits of David’s case are not the issue here, but only magnify the injustice of the abuse at ADMAX. I am seeking your aid in correcting the willful violation of USBOP rules and regulations by the guards at ADMAX–which include the denial of right to legal counsel regarding pending proceedings and denial of right to reasonable dental care (David has had an abscessed tooth for nearly three months which has been disregarded). A summary of these matters is attached, however, the extension of your good offices in addressing these problems, heretofore swept under the rug, is truly necessary and will affect other constituents as well.

Sincerely, Roland Hinkson.
It was no surprise that Senator Allard was unable to do anything. I believe it was mainly because of his short timeframe left in office.

By turning the spotlight on abusive behavior by government agents (police, prosecutors and judges) charged with carrying out the proper procedures that Americans believe in and expect, can only strengthen our Nation. Regardless of how tough the job is for the overseers, we citizens must always keep the light shining on them. For law enforcers to make deals with criminals to get convictions leads to corruption.

Elitists in power in America today intimidate those we choose to serve us. To blow the whistle or deviate from their dictates can be fatal to careers. But we must again become a nation where law and order rule, not powerful men. Otherwise, we will not be citizens–we'll become nothing but slaves.

If police use informants and they, the police, in fact violate any law in so doing, they must be charged and punished the same as any lay citizen. But how does this "Informant System" work?