In New Jersey, Yet More Privileged Phone Calls Between Prisoners and Attorneys Recorded and Used by Prosecutors
by Douglas Ankney
A New Jersey prisoner filed a putative class-action lawsuit on December 19, 2023, alleging that privileged telephone communications with his attorney were recorded by the jail where he was held, provided to prosecutors and used against him at trial. Disturbingly, this is not the first such case—in fact it seems to be a trend.
Yursil Kidwai, 45, is serving a six-year term in state prison on a plea deal he took on sexual assault charges. It was during discovery for trial that he said the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office (HCPO) “inadvertently” produced copies of a memo from Det. Ashley Rubel to Det. Sgt. Leslie Murphy and Assistant Chief Prosecutor Jane Weiner, digesting the substance of Kidawi’s attorney-client telephone calls while he was held awaiting trial at Hudson County Correctional Facility (HCCF) in May 2020.
With the aid of attorneys Mark A. Berman and Kelly A. Zampino of Hartmann Doherty Rosa Berman & Bulbulia LLP in Hackensack, Kidwai filed suit in federal court for the District of New Jersey pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging his civil rights were violated by HCCF and Director Ronald Edwards, the County Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (DCR) and HCPO, as well as Rubel, Murphy, Weiner and Chief County Prosecutor Esther Suarez.
The complaint alleged three causes of action: (1) a violation of Kidwai’s Fourth and Six Amendment Constitutional rights; (2) a failure by HCCF to train its staff; and (3) a conspiracy among Defendants to violate Plaintiff’s civil rights. DCR, HCCF and Edwards were further accused of having a policy, custom and practice of conspiring with HCPO to record and use the privileged communications in prosecuting Plaintiff and members of the putative class, in violation of their constitutional rights. Kidwai also accused remaining Defendants of using the privileged communications in both his criminal case and an asset forfeiture case; he said that HCCF recorded privileged calls of at least one other HCCF detainee, sharing them also with HCPO personnel who used the information to prosecute the detainee. The complaint seeks injunctive relief to end the illegal practice as well as compensatory and punitive damages. See: Kidwai v. Hudson Cty. Prosecutor’s Off., USDC (D.N.J.), Case No. 2:23-cv-23206.
In clear violation of the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of a criminal defendant’s right to effective assistance of counsel, privileged communications between the incarcerated and their attorneys have also been recorded and shared with prosecutors at the federal Bureau of Prisons’ former Leavenworth Detention Center in Missouri; a class-action lawsuit filed over that was settled by telecommunication provider Securus Technologies and the prison’s private operator, CoreCivic, for $3.7 million in July 2020, as PLN reported. [See: PLN, Jan. 2021, p.56.] Another class-action accusing Securus of the same shenanigans at San Diego County jails was settled for $900,000 in November 2021, as PLN also reported. [See: PLN, Feb. 2022, p.36.] Telecommunications at HCCF are provided under contract by Securus competitor Global Tel*Link (now ViaPath); however, the provider has not been named in Kidwai’s suit.
Additional source: Tech Dirt
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Kidwai v. Hudson Cty. Prosecutor’s Off.
| Year | 2023 |
|---|---|
| Cite | USDC (D.N.J.), Case No. 2:23-cv-23206 |
| Level | District Court |