Working

W
Working
ki to
t Extend
E t d Democracy
D
to
t All 
Volume
Volume
V
V l
1, N
1
Number
b 10
10

October

O
O t b 2012
October
2012

AGREEMENT TO END HOSTILITIES
To whom it may concern and
all California Prisoners:

G

reetings from the entire PBSPSHU Short Corridor Hunger Strike
Representatives. We are hereby
presenting this mutual agreement on behalf
of all racial groups here in the PBSP-SHU
Corridor. Wherein, we have arrived at a
mutual agreement concerning the following points:
1. If we really want to bring about substantive meaningful changes to the CDCR
system in a manner beneficial to all
solid individuals, who have never been
broken by CDCR’s torture tactics intended to coerce one to become a state
informant via debriefing, that now is the
time to for us to collectively seize this
moment in time, and put an end to more
than 20-30 years of hostilities between
our racial groups.

CONTENTS
Agreement to End Hostilities....1
Suggestions to CDCR ..............2
Overturn Prison Oppression ....2
New Folsom Riot......................4
Editorial 1-10 ............................6
Quote Box ................................6
Letters ......................................7
What’s With PTO? ...................8
Media Access Bill Passed ........9

2. Therefore, beginning on October 10,
2012, all hostilities between our racial
groups… in SHU, Ad-Seg, General Population, and County Jails, will officially
cease. This means that from this date on,
all racial group hostilities need to be at
an end… and if personal issues arise between individuals, people need to do all
they can to exhaust all diplomatic means
to settle such disputes; do not allow personal, individual issues to escalate into
racial group issues!!
3. We also want to warn those in the General Population that IGI will continue to
plant undercover Sensitive Needs Yard
(SNY) debriefer “inmates” amongst
the solid GP prisoners with orders from
IGI to be informers, snitches, rats, and
obstructionists, in order to attempt to
disrupt and undermine our collective
groups’ mutual understanding on issues
intended for our mutual causes [i.e.,
forcing CDCR to open up all GP main
lines, and return to a rehabilitative-type
system of meaningful programs/privileges, including lifer conjugal visits, etc.
via peaceful protest activity/noncooperation e.g., hunger strike, no labor, etc.
etc.]. People need to be aware and vigilant to such tactics, and refuse to allow
such IGI inmate snitches to create chaos
and reignite hostilities amongst our racial groups. We can no longer play into
IGI, ISU, OCS, and SSU’s old manipulative divide and conquer tactics!!!
In conclusion, we must all hold strong to
our
o mutual agreement from this point on
a focus our time, attention, and energy
and
on
o mutual causes beneficial to all of us [i.e.,
prisoners],
p
and our best interests. We can no
longer
l
allow CDCR to use us against each
o
other
for their benefit!! Because the reality

is that collectively, we are an empowered,
mighty force, that can positively change
this entire corrupt system into a system that
actually benefits prisoners, and thereby, the
public as a whole… and we simply cannot
allow CDCR/CCPOA – Prison Guard’s
Union, IGI, ISU, OCS, and SSU, to continue to get away with their constant form
of progressive oppression and warehousing
of tens of thousands of prisoners, including the 14,000 (+) plus prisoners held in
solitary confinement torture chambers [i.e.
SHU/Ad-Seg Units], for decades!!!
We send our love and respects to all
those of like mind and heart… onward in
struggle and solidarity… ●
Presented by the PBSP-SHU Short Corridor Collective (August 12, 2012):
Todd Ashker, C58191, D1-119
Arturo Castellanos, C17275, D1-121
Sitawa Nantambu Jamaa (Dewberry),
C35671, D1-117
Antonio Guillen, P81948, D2-106
And the Representatives Body:
Danny Troxell, B76578, D1-120
George Franco, D46556, D4-217
Ronnie Yandell, V27927, D4-215
Paul Redd, B72683, D2-117
James Baridi Williamson, D-34288, D4107
Alfred Sandoval, D61000, D4-214
Louis Powell, B59864, D1-104
Alex Yrigollen, H32421, D2-204
Gabriel Huerta, C80766, D3-222
Frank Clement, D07919, D3-116
Raymond Chavo Perez, K12922, D1-219
James Mario Perez, B48186, D3-124
[NOTE: All names and the statement
must be verbatim when used & posted
on any website or media, or non-media,
publications.]

SUGGESTIONS TO CDCR ON CHANGES TO REGULATIONS
To Whom It May Concern:
e are two of the representatives
here at Pelican Bay State Prison
(PBSP) Security Housing Unit
(SHU). We write this piece as individuals.
And because several pieces back, we stated
that we were not just going to sit on our
hands in these cells and do nothing while
waiting for the revisions to the “STG” to
come out, or be placed in the regulations,
we write the following. Also, we’re all still
waiting for CDCR to grant Core Demands
1 through 3! Soon we’ll know where we
stand.
Anyway, the main reason behind this
piece is that, after reading all the countless prison periodicals that all our outside
supporters have been sending us since the
beginning of this struggle, we quickly realized that we in the SHU are not the only
ones who have been going through CDCR’s countless deprivations for over the
past 20 to 30 years. All men and women
across California’s prison system, whether
in Administrative Segregation or on the
General Population, have suffered from
similar CDCR tactics. We finally decided
that this was the right time to put this paper
together - some here have referred to it as
a “wish list” - on behalf of not only SHU
prisoners, but also on behalf of all CDCR
prisoners, because the time for change is
now!
That said, and because CDCR Secretary
Matthew Cate, as well as state lawmakers,
have the full authority to make such changes immediately, the following are suggestions that Mr. Cate should order be done
for the benefit of all CDCR prisoners, male
and female alike.. Therefore it is suggested
that he:
1. Order that all past Rule Violation Reports (RVR) issued to CDCR prisoners for
participating in the last two peaceful Hunger Strikes be rescinded and removed from
all prisoners’ C-files.
2. Order that no RVR be issued to any
CDCR prisoner in retaliation for participating and/or leading in any future peaceful
Hunger Strikes.
3. Order that CDCR prisoners who
participate in any future peaceful Hunger
Strikes not be retaliated against by placing
any of them in Administrative Segregation,
or have any of their personal property removed, or be moved to other cells.
4. Order that more funds be provided for

W

2

education and for real rehabilitation programs (such as college, GED, vocational
training, etc.) - instead of just placing it after CDC - from CDCR funds and/or from
our Inmate Welfare Funds (IWF), in order
to hire additional new teachers. This could
be accomplished, for example by coordinating with colleges and students to provide education. CDCR should also provide
programming services such as overseeing
and administering proctored exams for any
prisoner and for vocational instructors, so
that all CDCR prisoners can have opportunities to learn and feel good about themselves. Moreover, these programs can help
those who are released from prison to stop
being stuck on the same gear then came to
prison on.
5. Order that California Code of regulations (CCR), Title 15, Section 3161 - inmate owned legal materials - be revised
to comply with the Prison Legal News
(PLN) settlement agreement. At present,
the language is so vague and confusing, in
Title 15, that CDCR staff includes all law
books, law periodicals, etc., as counting
toward the ten book limit, where instead
they should be considered as “legal materials” and should nly be counted towards the
combined six cubic feet of state issued and
personal items, excluding bedding and appliances (Title 15, Section 3190 (c)), plus
one cubic foot of related legal materials of
an active case (Title 15, Section 3161). Until the changes are made, a memo should
be issued to all CDCR prisons to be posted
in all unit sections reflecting the PLN settlement agreement at page 4, Section (g).
[Formerly cited as PLN v Schwarzenegger,
now cited as PLN v Brown.]
6. Order that the Department of Operations Manual (DOM) be revised to state
that any CDCR prisoner will be permitted
to donate their old personal TV or radio appliances to another CDCR prisoner who is
indigent, so that appliance is placed on their
CDCR form 160-H, Inmate Property Control Card. Until that point, a memo should
be issued to all prisons permitting this.
7. Order that the DOM and CCR Title
15 be revised to where it will increase all
D-status prisoners’ maximum canteen draw
from $55. to $65. per month. Until that
point, a memo should be issued to all prisons permitting this.
8. Order that the DOM be revised to
where all SHU prisoners are also permit-

ted to participate in donating funds to good
outside charity causes, via “Charity Food
Drives,” just like the ones held for General
Population prisoners. Until that revision is
made, a memo should be sent to all SHU
prisoners permitting this.
9. Order that the DOM be revised so
that all CDCR prisoners in Administrative
Segregation be permitted to possess their
personally owned TV and/or radio in their
cells, with or without fire sprinklers. Until
that point, a memo should be issued to all
prisons permitting this, as well as issuing
an order to the prison maintenance dept. to
make sure that fire sprinklers are immediately installed in all Administrative Segregation cells, including all SHU cells.
10. Order that the DOM and Title 15,
Section 3117 (b)(2) be revised to where
General Population lifers are again allowed “family overnight visits” with their
families. Right now, only the lifers in all
of CDCR who are allowed family visits are
those who CDCR decides may have visits
based on having snitched/debriefed. Until
that point, a memo should be issued to all
prisons permitting lifer family visits under
the prior amended regulation.
11. Order the California Prison Industry
Authority (CAL-PIA) to produce decent
quality mattresses. The current all-cottoncore mattresses do not have a way to keep
the cotton evenly distributed (as the older
ones could). Within a week or two, on all
concrete bunks, a new mattress becomes a
flat and lumpy torture mattress, due to cotton shifting.
12. Order that the DOM and CCR Title
15, Section 3190 (i) be revised so that all
SHU prisoners also be allowed to order, in
addition to one annual 30 lbs. food package, a second annual non-food special
purchase package (including such items as
sweatpants, shorts, sweatshirts, thermals,
tennis shoes, cable, etc.). Until such revisions are made, a memo should be issued to
all SHU prisoners permitting this.
13. Order that the DOM, Chapter 4, Article 43, in relation to inmate property, be
revised, if it has not yet been, to allow all
CDCR SHU and Administrative Segregation prisoners to order and possess the additional following items: no limit on chocolate candy bars; no limit on sugar-free hard
candy; all Asian soups; all dry jerky meats
(i.e., nugget and slices of beef, turkey,
pork, pepperoni, salami, and chicken); all
Rock

trail mix items; dried chili peppers/pods;
all cheeses (i.e., cheese sticks, etc.); all seasonings; all powdered sugar-free beverage
drinks in any kind of containers (SHU prison staff removes the items from their containers); all tea and tea bags (as long as they
don’t have staples on the bags); 12 foot earphone extension cords; all art supplies that
are already approved for SHU prisoners;
one sweatpants and one sweat-shorts (2 total) and sweatpants/shorts with cords (we
are presently allowed shoe-strings and our
new laundry bags have a 9 to 10 inch long
cord already attached, showing that cord
is not a security threat); all Dickies Thermals, tops and bottoms; hair grease; lotion;
laundry soap. Administrative Segregation
should be included for these items also
because most wait years in Administrative Segregation before they’re sent to the
SHU. Administrative Segregation literally
becomes a SHU overflow. Until such revisions are made, a memo should be issued
permitting all these items in food and nonfood packages.
14. Order that the DOM and Title 15,
Section 3220.4 be revised to where all
movie/videos rated “R” be permitted to be
shown to all the CDCR prison populations.
At present, we are only allowed up to rated
“PG13” movies and videos. We are not 13
year old children, or in juvenile detention
center. We are grown men and women in
adult state prisons. Therefore, we should be
allowed to watch “R” rated movies/videos.
Until those revisions are made, a memo
should be issued to all CDCR prisons permitting “R” rated movies and videos to be
shown to all the prison populations.
15. Order that the DOM be revised to
state that all CDCR prisons shall provide
their prison population with the minimum
of twenty quality entertainment channels,
especially prisons like PBSP that are so isolated that they cannot even receive one TV
channel off the air, even with a digital antenna. Presently, these prisons only receive
eight low quality charter cable entertainment channels. Until then, a memo should
be issued ordering this.
16. Order all CDCR prisoner (especially
those like PBSP) to use the CDCR funds
that are specifically designated from the
CDCR budget for entertainment to also be
used to immediately purchase all the necessary entertainment equipment, storage
sheds for that equipment, and any needed
satellite dishes. These funds should also be
used to add the above mentioned minimum
twenty quality entertainment channels to
Volume 1, Number 10

all CDCR prisons as well as to pay the required fees and costs to cable companies to
receive the twenty channels.
17. Order all CDCR prisons to use the
funds from the CDCR budget specifically
designated for exercise equipment, to immediately be used to purchase and install
all the dip and pull-up bars on all the CDCR’s SHU and Administrative Segregation
yards.
18. Order that all prison administrations
conduct monthly meetings with SHU and
Administrative Segregation representatives
in order to have dialogue with those prisoners to address any prisoner grievances that
can be dealt with at the institutional level.
The Following Suggestion are for
the California Legislative Branch:
Because the California Legislature has
the full authority to amend and make state
law, it is suggested they:
1. Amend California Penal Code, Sections 2600 and 2601 to restore the original
“Inmate Bill of Rights” that was signed
and enacted into law by the present Governor Brown in 1976. The Bill of Rights,
for example, stated that CDCR prisoners,
and thus their extended families, were
guaranteed rights to receive personal visits, subject only to such restrictions as were
necessary for the reasonable security of the
institution. [Former Section 2601(d)]
2. Amend California Penal Code, Section 2933.6 so that SHU and Administrative Segregation (D-status) prisoners can
again receive 1/3 credit earning for being
discipline free while in SHU or Administrative Segregation. As of now, by contrast,
these prisoners receive absolutely no credit
for this time, which provides no incentive
whatsoever to be disciplinary free. Also under current law under Section 2933.6, one
who is validated as either a gang member
or associate, with no RVR - which the majority will be under CDCR’s coming new
STG - who have, for example, a ten year
sentence, will be placed in Administrative
Segregation, then SHU, and will have to
complete the entire ten years in SHU, die
or debrief. Thus, no incentive remains to be
disciplinary free.
3. Amend California Penal Code 5006,
relating to Inmate Welfare Funds (IWF)
so that it can also be used, for example, to
purchase all the needed exercise equipment
(see CDCR suggestion 17, above) and for
entertainment purposes (see CDCR suggestions 15 - 16 above). This way, prison
administrators cannot continue to play

delay games with those monies like they
are presently doing with these monies set
aside from the CDCR budget. In addition,
the IWF belongs solely to all CDCR prisoners. It was created to reimburse services
to prisoners, including their training and
education and to underwrite the prison
canteens. Prisoners, who are taxed for that
purpose by the CDCR on purchases and the
like, have paid all the funds that go into the
IWF. Those monies are not court ordered
restitution funds, nor do they belong to
CDCR, even though they sometimes at like
they do. Every penny in the IWF belongs
to all CDCR prisoners. Therefore, when
the issue is our IWF money, the legislature
should submit and pass bills like the one
we prisoners are requesting be amended
here so that our own monies can be spent
on our immediate needs.
In Conclusion:
Because the above suggestions will affect, in some form, all CDCR prisoners,
their families, and all our outside supporters, it is requested that these parties stand
together in solidarity and all write, email
and fax their full support with the lists in
this piece to CDCR Secretary Matthew
Cate, and all California Legislative branches, as well as send copies to all CDCR prisoners so they too can read and write letters
to Secretary Cate. ●
Thank you very much,
We both send our utmost gratitude, respect and love to all our outside supporters and all family members who have remained strong with all prisoners in our
united struggle. Always in solidarity,
Arturo Castellanos, C-17275
Todd Ashker, C58191
PBSP-SHUPO Box 7500
Crescent City, CA 95532
The Morgue by Michael Russell

3

PEACEFULLY OVERTURNING PRISON OPPRESSION

I

have some words for the Rock and for
PHSS News because we have to realize that our next major demonstration,
if needed, would have to be effective and
cause economic consequences to the profit
driven California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation (CDCR).
Our only hope toward over-turning
the current prison oppression is through
“peaceful” prison demonstrations (if necessary). Those of us held in solitary confinement units (i.e., SHUs/Ad Segs), or
those of you on General Population who
are political, influential, need to know that
CDCR has been validating individuals
who the prison administrators do not want
on prison yards. It has nothing to do with
whether you are a prison gang member/associate or not. That’s just something they
use to manipulate some intended threat to
the safety and security of the institution, in
order to hold you in solitary confinement,
(in which none of us should fear of being
placed.) Our task before us is understanding that the prison officials have been the
threat to the safety and security of all prisons (i.e., prisoners) because it has been
their profit driven practices that have disrupted the programs, privileges and rehabilitation toward the mental growth and
development of all prisoners. There should
be serious considerations around what prisoners should be doing in response to the
latest security threat group (STG) proposal
by CDCR, which they are now calling “the
Blue Print.” There have been many suggestions in the ‘short corridor’ around the
following:
1. Hunger Strike (to the death);
2. Massive single cell demonstrations due
to the stressful environment that prison
officials/officers have caused for prisoners (GP, SHU, Ad Seg);
3. One year of an economic boycott, (GP,
SHU, Ad Seg),
4. Massive filing of 602 appeals, on the
issues that are having an adverse effect
on our persons; taking them to the third
level and then to outside court;
5. Tracking all funds allocated to prison officials for running prisons, and making
sure we know where every penny of the
$9.2 billion are going, annually;
6. Having strong communication lines
between all respected principal groups,
so that C/Os and prison informers (i.e.,
snitches) can not cause conflict amongst
4

groups, leading to unnecessary violence;
7. Reject all foods that do not have any nutritional value or meet the caloric standardized requirement per institutional
policy [2600 to 2800 calories per day]
-- non-natural sugar fruits; reject all processed meats that have no nutritional
value or meet the heart-healthy standard
advocated by CDCR dietician in Sacramento;
8. It’s important to know that those of us
held illegally in solitary confinement
are coming back to General Population
(GP), some sooner than others. Based on
my personal understanding of how GP
is structured now and how prison guards
have used lockdowns to coerce prisoners
into ‘questionnaire hearings’, whenever
something occurs on a prison yard, and
C/Os use the threat of leaving prisoners
on lockdown if they don’t participate in
these hearings (regardless if the prisoners have something to do with a disturbance or not), we should collectively
reject going to the hearings outright. We
did this in Salinas Valley State Prison,
C Yard, in which the ‘Damu Family’
stayed on lockdown for 90 days for refusing to participate in such a program,
and we were never asked again to go to
these hearings (1999/2000);
9. We must get back to the mentality where
prison officials/officers have no control
over us (prisoners) by removing our
emotional connections to the following:
VISITING, where I hear you can’t touch
your family no more!! Canteen: heart
attack purchases. Packages: restricted
items. Yard: modern day gladiator cages.
TV: reduced to kiddy porn through manipulation; and we need No adult programming/Christian-orientation/ indoctrination, which is nothing of pertinent
value toward mental development. Day
Room: prison romper room, etc. Once
we analyze our concrete conditions, we
can easily see how prison officials/officers have done everything to jeopardize
our livelihood in these prisons;
We must come up with peaceful demonstrations in order to combat ‘all prison
oppression’ which is something we all
can agree on, no matter who we are. So
if you have better suggestions, then write
to Ed Mead and convey your thoughts to
him. With all due respect, use your name
because we are very suspicious of those

who withhold their identity, because of
the many ‘obstructionists’ we have come
across, attempting to represent the interests
of the prisoners, while aiding and abetting
prison officials against our interests. We all
should be able to stand on our principles
and convictions in that regard. ●
Mutope, aka Bow Low, James Crawford,
PBSP-SHU, Short Corridor

60 INMATES
INVOLVED IN NEW
FOLSOM PRISON
Riot That Left 13 Injured

S

ixty inmates were involved in a riot
at New Folsom Prison today that left
one inmate with a gunshot wound
from a correctional officer’s rifle and 12
more inmates with injuries, according to
the California Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation.
Four of the 13 inmates have already
been treated and returned to New Folsom
Prison, formally known as California State
Prison-Sacramento. An unknown number
of inmates suffered minor injuries and were
treated at the facility, according to a news
release from the CDCR.
No correctional officers were injured in
the melee, which began about 11:15 a.m. at
one of the prison’s maximum security, general population yards. Prison officials say
the cause of the riot is under investigation.
To break up the fight, correctional officers used less-than-lethal methods, including “blast dispersion rounds,” before resorting to their Mini 14 rifles. Officers fired
six shots, injuring one inmate, according to
the CDCR news release.
The other inmates suffered stab wounds
or head trauma.
Officers recovered four inmate-made
weapons, the news release states.
California State Prison-Sacramento
houses more than 2,600 inmates, most of
them serving long sentences or those who
had behavior issues at other institutions.
Sacramento Bee, 9/19/2012

Rock

ADVOCACY GROUPS WARY OF NEW PLAN FOR PRISON
ISOLATION UNITS
Michael Montgomery, California Watch,
September 13, 2012
tate corrections officials are moving forward with a plan for handling prison gangs and other violent
groups, including changing rules that have
kept some inmates locked in special isolation units for decades.
But the initiative is raising concern
among prisoner rights advocates and some
experts who worry that it will do little to
improve stark conditions or cut the backlog of inmates awaiting placement into the
units.
“There’s nothing I can see in this policy
that will change the flow of inmates into
these very expensive facilities,” said David
Ward, a retired University of Minnesota sociologist who served on an influential 2007
expert panel appointed by the state to study
how California manages prison gangs.
At issue are California’s four Security
Housing Units, which are designed to isolate the state’s most dangerous inmates, including those connected to violent prison
gangs. The units routinely have been denounced as inhumane by civil rights groups
and were the focus of widespread hunger
strikes last year.
Early next month, the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation will begin
modifying operations in the special units
under a plan that has been in development
for more than a year. The department has
asserted that nearly all 3,000 inmates being
held in the facilities – at Pelican Bay State
Prison, California State Prison Corcoran,
the California Correctional Institution in
Tehachapi and California State Prison Sacramento – are active in prison gangs.
“We’ve had years of violence in our
facilities and in the community that have
been driven by prison gangs,” said Terri
McDonald, the department’s undersecretary of operations. “We’re going to implement this policy in a thoughtful, measured
way to ensure institutional and community
security.”
Formal changes to state regulations
could take several years, she said. In the
meantime, the department is implementing
the policy on a pilot basis. Under the plan,
inmates are eligible to work their way out
of the special units in three to four years if
they complete special programs alongside
prisoners from rival groups and do not en-

S

Volume 1, Number 10

gage in gang “behavior or activities.” McDonald said inmates will not be required to
divulge inside information about the gangs
in order to earn transfers out of the units,
a controversial practice known as “debriefing.”
Other changes include new criteria to determine who can be sent to the units.
Under current rules, an inmate is automatically placed in a Security Housing Unit
if he is identified as a member or associate
of one of seven prison gangs. According to
a policy draft released by the corrections
department in March, prison gang associates would be sent to isolation units only
if they were “engaged in serious criminal
gang behavior or a pattern of violent behavior.” The department also would target
dangerous members of any group considered a threat to prison security, including
street gangs and extremist groups.
The changes will give prison staff more
flexibility in dealing with a range of “security threat groups,” according to an Aug.
30 corrections department notice sent to the
California Correctional Peace Officers Association, the powerful union representing
prison guards.
The new policies will put California
more closely in line with “recognized national standards and strategies,” staving off
the “inevitable litigation and court mandated changes the State would face by remaining exclusively reliant on the current
system,” according to the document.

SHU Syndrome by Michael Russell

But revisions in a June 29 corrections
document obtained by California Watch
suggest that officials are moving away
from the narrower focus on specific criminal or violent acts. Rather, they appear to
be reviving controversial guidelines that
have allowed authorities to send inmates
to the special units for violations such as
gang-related tattoos and drawings.
The updated version of the policy relies on a number of factors to determine
whether an inmate already identified as an
associate of a security threat group would
be placed in isolation – roughly two thirds
of the inmates currently in the special units
are classified as associates. In addition to
violent acts such as murder and assault,
prison officials would consider an inmate’s
disciplinary record, including:
• Security threat group-related tattoos
and/or body markings
• Clothing worn “with the intent to intimidate, promote membership or depict affiliation in a security threat group”
• The leading or incitement of a disturbance, riot or strike
• Possession of artwork showing security
threat group symbols
• Use of hand signs, gestures, handshakes
and slogans that specifically relate to a
security threat group.
Advocacy groups have long complained
that the evidence used by the corrections
department, like tattoos and drawings, often is vague and inaccurate. They also say
the process does not always identify men
involved in violent or illegal acts.
“The department’s approach continues to
be guilt by association,” said Don Specter,
director of the Berkeley-based Prison Law
Office.
But McDonald said the guidelines are a
useful tool in identifying high-risk inmates
active in violent gangs.
“When you put a gang tattoo on your
body, you are saying to the inmate community, ‘I’m a member of this gang; I represent the values of this gang.’ It’s a purposeful act,” she said. “You’re propagating
gang behavior in the prisons, and you’re
creating a risk to the institution and the
community.”
Still, McDonald said she expects some
inmates now being held in the special units
could qualify for transfer under the new
policy.
5

A special committee already has begun
to review case files of nearly every inmate
at Pelican Bay’s Security Housing Unit using the department’s new gang-related disciplinary criteria. The first reviews could
be finished next month, after officials complete a visit to Pelican Bay.
“I believe there will be inmates who are
reviewed in the case-by-case reviews …
who, based on their willingness not to be
engaged in gang behavior, will be released
out to a general-population prison setting,”
McDonald said.
She said that initially, the reviews will
focus on inmates who have been held in the
special units the longest. According to department data released last year, some 500
prisoners have been locked in isolation for
more than a decade.
Charles Carbone, a prominent prisoner
rights attorney, said the new policy lacks
credibility, and it would be difficult for the
department to persuade inmates to participate in the programs.
“The promised reforms are a power
grab,” he said. “They give the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation more authority and power to track
more prisoners for gang activity and to
place, ultimately, more in supermax prison
settings. This is not a scaling back of supermax prisons as is being done in other
states.”
In May, lawyers for the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a lawsuit on behalf
of hundreds of Pelican Bay inmates who
have served more than 10 years in the prison’s Security Housing Unit, claiming their
prolonged isolation in windowless cells
violated due process and amounted to cruel
and unusual punishment. A federal judge
has scheduled a case management conference for December. ●

6

EDITORIAL 1-10

I

am good with money but can use more
stamps. I did not have enough to mail
out this issue and had to buy some with
money that would have been better used for
paper, toner, etc. If you have some stamps
to spare, please send them to me.
Some have written and asked what a subscription costs. It costs me a little over two
stamps to produce and mail each issue, if
you send two stamps per issue or 24 stamps
per year ($10.80) you’ll reduce my costs.
If you send three stamps per issue or 36
stamps per year ($16.20) that would help to
cover the many free ones I send out to those
who have not contributed anything. In the
past I have threatened to drop the freeloaders, but I’ve never done so as I believe everyone in the SHU deserves to receive this
information. So those of you who can afford it help out those who can’t or who are
unwilling to pay their fair share.
In other news, the new 37 page draft
STG Policy version 7.0 is available online at https://www.documentcloud.org/
documents/426255-stg-policy-7-0.html.
It’s way too long for me to print here and
I don’t think I could do an adequate job
of summarizing it for you here (I could in
Prison Focus but I’m not sure when it’s
coming out again). If your captors have not
yet provided you with a copy, you might
want to have your loved ones on the outside print it out and mail it in to you.
If you have submitted a letter or article
for publication and have not seen it printed
yet, it is because one of two reasons. First,
because I give priority to HS-related material from the reps, and, secondly, because
I am too busy or too lazy to keyboard the
document so it can be included in the newsletter. I still have those letters and articles
and, if not yet moot, I do plan to print some
of them when things slow down some. I
have enough material that I could actually
put this publication out twice a month—
that is of course if I had the time, volunteers, and money to do so. In other words,
this will continue to be monthly for a long
time to come. If you have someone on the
streets to keyboard your articles or letters,
then, I am ashamed to admit, that would
substantially increase the likelihood of
their being printed.
In the last issue you read about two race
riots in California prisons, in this issue you
read about one more—at New Folsom.
Please understand that there will be either
struggle or there will be barbarism. The

anger of the oppressed must be expressed,
even if in a self-destructive manner. Without struggle CDCR will triumph, which
will lead to the annihilation of hope. Without hope there cannot be victory. Today
we face the choice of peaceful, active, and
conscious struggle on the one hand, or defeat and hopelessness on the other. We are
at a crossroads—the building of a peaceful
struggle for justice or more fear, death, and
destruction. The choice is yours to make.
But to make no decision is still making a
choice. The call for a cease fire may or may
not be effective. If effective it will not last
forever. It’s pretty simple. Peacefully resist
or the system will descend into some form
of self-destructive barbarism. Again, the
choice is yours. But as you can clearly see,
the cannibals are on the march. ●
Ed Mead

Quote Box
“A small body of determined spirits
fired by an unquenchable faith in their
mission can alter the course of history.”
Mahatma Gandhi
“Nothing strengthens authority so
much as silence.”
Leonardo da Vinci
“Where is the justice of political power if it executes the murderer and jails the
plunderer, and then itself marches upon
neighboring lands, killing thousands and
pillaging the very hills?”
Kahlil Gibran - 1883 - April 10, 1931
“Everything is backwards; everything
is upside down. Doctors destroy health,
lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, governments destroy
freedom, the major media destroy information, and religions destroy spirituality.”
Michael Ellner
“It should be no surprise that when
rich men take control of the government, they pass laws that are favorable
to themselves. The surprise is that those
who are not rich vote for such people,
even though they should know from bitter experience that the rich will continue
to rip off the rest of us.”
Andrew Greeley, Chicago Sun-Times
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his
country from its government.”
Thomas Paine
Rock

[Note: Names of letter writers will be
withheld unless the author of the letter explicitly approves printing of their name.]
The Connection between Commie
Rhetoric and What’s Needed to
Bring About Changes Within Isolation Chambers (Ad-Seg and the
SHU)
In the September 2012 issue of the newsletter Rock, in the editorial notes section,
was a statement concerning the absence of
[the editor’s usual] commie rhetoric in the
newsletter due to an effort to focus only on
aspects of the struggle against the SHU and
draconian policies that put people in there.
I fail to see the logic in this decision due
to the true ideology of communism which
most prisoners aren’t aware of—the relatable information concerning what needs to
be done to bring about changes within AdSeg and the SHU.
As has been written about before, the
Marxist doctrine is true, comprehensive,
harmonious, and offers an integral process void of any forms of oppression used
against prisoners in Ad-Seg and the SHU.
Prisoners need to know this!
From the inception of isolation chambers in the prison system a great number of
prisoners have bowed down and accepted
being oppressed and exploited instead of
standing up for their rights. Subjects such
as communism need to be written about as
much as possible at every opportunity that
presents itself.
There must be an effort to give prisoners
a basic grounding in the fundamentals of
communism so that they will be taught the
[role of prisons in capitalist society] and the
underlying reason why prisoners are being
labeled members and associates of a prison
gang and placed in Ad-Seg and the SHU.
For years the propagation of misunderstood information has led to a multitude of
prisoners to promote an ideology of prison
politics that are destructive to their very
existence. It’s time to reeducate prisoners about the true nature and intention of
prison politics and they were put forth and
promoted within the prison system during
the 1960s by prisoner who had grasped the
true process of communism.
In Solidarity.
Tony Stitt
Volume 1, Number 10

Languishing in ASU
There are hundreds if not thousands of us in Ad-Seg (ASU) in
all of the 33 prisons. We have
been validated and are awaiting
transfer to indeterminate Corcoran or Pelican Bay SHUs. We
sit here for two to three years
waiting to be transferred. I am
currently validated and have
been waiting to be transferred
to Corcoran SHU for two years
now, and there are three others in the same
situation here at CMF ASU.
We keep hearing that CDCR is going
to implement the new STG-1 and STG-2
program and review all of the validated
inmate’s files and potentially release some
associate STG-1 inmates to general population. Our understanding is that CDCR was
going to start the reviews in August 1012 at
Pelican Bay SHU. We who have been sitting in these Ad-Seg units throughout the
CDCR for two to three years are starving
for information about this process while we
sit here in these ASUs with no radio or TV
in limbo isolation.
We are hopeful you can shed some light
on when CDCR may get to a review of the
rest of us validated inmates and if they have
actually started anywhere, be it Pelican
Bay or wherever. We know the STG is just
a smoke screen to further CDCR’s agenda
on putting most all of us in SHU isolation
forever, but we are grasping at straws in the
hopes that there is a way of out the SHU
besides debriefing. No one, I repeat, no one
should bow down to CDCR’s bureaucratic
BS of debriefing. It hurts all of us to help
CDCR further their agenda of mass isolation and sensory deprivation.
We would appreciate any news you
have in regards to the review of validated
inmates CDCR has said that was going to
start to take place in August of 2012.
Name withheld

LETTERS

LETTERS

[Ed’s Response: Of course you are correct. Every significant advance in the struggle of prisoners has been led by communists
on the inside. Even the prisoners during
the Attica uprising demanded transportation to a non-imperialist country. When led
by ideologies other than Marxism, on the
other hand, such struggles generally result
in prisoners killing prisoners, as in the case
of the 1980 New Mexico riot in which 33
prisoners were killed by other prisoners.
Only Marxism gives us the ideological
tools needed to build a national prisoner’s
movement that looks beyond mere token
reforms that prisoncrats can withdraw just
as soon as we look the other way.
I belong to no political party or trend, and
I won’t recommend that readers examine
any specific communist group or organization. I would however suggest that you take
the time to read some basic Marxist literature, such as the Communist Manifesto or
materials by other progressive thinkers.
Socialism and communism are the same
thing, the former is but the first stage of the
latter. Some countries my call themselves
communist or socialist, such as the China
or Russia, but the test is a simple one: are
the means of production in private or public hands—are they in the hands of the rich
or in the hands of the people who produce
everything? Using this test, neither China
nor Russia are socialist. Sometime you will
hear someone say Obama is a socialist, but
if he is not putting the means of production
into the hands of the people (something the
bourgeois constitution prohibits) he is not
a socialist.
Socialism cannot be elected to office,
it must be the result of a revolution—the
bourgeois state must be smashed and totally replaced—police, courts, prisons, the
whole apparatus of repression smashed and
replaced by institutions created by working
people. This new system will extend political and economic democracy to all.
As the editorial Mr. Stitt was writing
about said, Rock will always be coming
from a class conscious perspective. I was
merely saying that I would not be preaching socialist ideology (as I’ve just done)
in these pages. But when an article arrives
that addresses the prison struggle from that
perspective, such as Mr. Landrum’s “The
Road Ahead”, it will be printed here.
What I was trying to say, however in artfully, is that the anti-Ad-Seg/SHU struggle
is made up of many ideologies, and that
Rock must account for this fact.]

[Ed’s Response: As far as I know there
have been no reviews of the type you mention. If any readers have different information please let me know and I’ll work to
get the news out. The whole STG is merely
a pretext to indefinitely lock anyone up,
not only alleged gang members. The STG
thing works to expand the state’s repression
of prisoners in the guise of positive reform.
The promised review is the carrot at the
end of that stick.]
Letters ................... Continued on page 10
7

WHAT’S WITH
PRISON TALK
ONLINE?
By Ed Mead
rison Talk Online (PTO) is an Internet-based forum in which family
members and loved ones of prisoners share information around prisoners
and various prison-related issues. It’s
pretty good sized too. PTO boasts 551,848
threads, 6,848,350 posts, 350,183 members, and 29,779 active Members. The
threads cover just about every aspect of
the prison experience, although many of
the posts address the concerns of the loved
ones of prisoners.
In around 2002 I too became a member
of PTO. It was some months before the
U.S. invaded hapless Iraq that I got into a
discussion of the subject on the PTO boards
(as these forums are called). A former federal prisoners who went by the handle of
FedX started PTO. He was one of those super-american patriots who at that time wen
on and on about how great it was that the
U.S. was going to invade Iraq. Well, I made
the mistake of posting something in opposition to the looming war and he promptly
banned me from PTO.
After starting the Rock newsletter I was
getting a lot of material from SHU prisoners that related to the struggle against the
validation process and SHUs in general.
I thought much of this material should
have a wider audience than just those who
read this little newsletter, so I started posting these prisoner writings on PTO. I felt
family members and the loved ones of
prisoners needed to read what the more advanced prisoners were writing, especially
the documents being sent out by the Short
Corridor Representatives. Accordingly, I
started posting these documents in the PTO
forums under heading “California Prison
News and Events.”
Here’s an example of how PTO suppresses prisoner speech. I posted the full
text of the “Agreement to End Hostilities”
document issued by the PBSP-SHU Short
Corridor Collective. This was a major
document that needed to get into the hands
of family members and the loved ones of
California prisoners. The document was
addressed to prisoners in every facility in
the state, and family members could have
helped get that important message, a message in support of peace, in to their loved
ones on the inside. What did PTO do? They

P

8

censored the post from the boards, they deleted it! When I objected they said it violated copyright rules. And if I didn’t like it
I could appeal. I wrote back:
“No, I’ll not appeal it. I’ve been in
and out of PTO for a very long time.
And nearly every time I leave it is because of anti-prisoner attitudes such as
yours--such as finding some rule that
does not apply and applying it to stifle pro-prisoner speech--suppressing
the actual voice of prisoners. I’m out
of here again. I’ll try again at some
point in the future, but for now you’ve
pretty much put an ice pick in the back
of what prisoners are trying to accom-

“PTO is not a forum open
to debating whether or
not anyone should be in
prison, should prisoners
and their families have
rights, etc.”
plish.”
PTO’s response was to delete a number
of other posts I’d made, such as CA Senate
Passes Prison Media Access Bill, PBSP:
Assessment of the Meetings with the Assistant Warden, Letter Regarding PBSP SHU
Demand Status, Document from PBSP
SHU Representatives, etc. And again I objected:
“I am the editor of a couple of prisoner-oriented publications. As such
prisoners send me letters containing
information they want the general
public to know about. I then keyboard
those letters and post them in forums
such as this, and in many cases publish
them in one of my newsletters.
“Now you are taking this material
that prisoners send to me and deleting it from the PTO forum because of
copyright rules. This information was
sent to me by prisoners to be distributed. It is not copyrighted.
“The first post you deleted could
bring a long needed peace to gang
violence in California prisons, not to
mention progress in conjugal visits
and other areas. It too was not copyrighted. Can you honestly think of a
more important document than prisoner leaders all coming together and
calling for an end to hostilities?
“I understand the PTO rules, and
when I post something from the mainstream media I give a brief synopsis
and then post a link to the actual ar-

ticle. But in this case I am posting letters sent to me by prisoners.”
The PTO response was, again, that my
posts violated their copyright rules. I replied:
“The guidelines are there for good
reasons, to protect PTO from copyright infringement litigation. I have no
problem with the rule. Indeed, as I said
in my last post, I know the rule and
I use it when posting items from the
bourgeois press.
“The point you are missing, however, is that none of the censored material was copyrighted. You are being
extremely overzealous in my case by
censoring un-copyrighted information
sent to me by prisoners. In this case,
important information that needs to be
in the hands of the friends and loved
ones of prisoners. This is going far beyond the rule. This is censorship and
persecution, and it works to harm the
legitimate cause of prisoners. Under
normal circumstances I would shrug
this off, but the call for peace on the inside is a monumental development and
needs to be widely circulated. Publishing the entire message on PTO would
have helped get the message to prisoners throughout the state. The effect of
your censorship is to retard the process
of bringing gang peace to those on the
inside.
“I will be writing about this whole
incident in the next issue of Prison Focus and the Rock newsletter. Prisoners
need to know about this censorship of
their message; they need to know what
Prison Talk Online is really all about.”
PTO’s next response was not only to delete my posts, but to delete my favorable
reply to the post of another user. I objected
again and in return got a listing of PTO
rules. Here is the essence of those rules and
my reply to them:
Freedom of Speech: “Anything
that goes against our core beliefs and
the purpose for which this community was designed may not be allowed.
Posts and comments that are meant to
incite conflicts between members or
outside parties are strictly prohibited.”
Did any of my posts “incite conflicts
between members or outside parties”?
I have read the rules and my speech
did not violate them. You had to twist
the rules in order to apply them to me.
I fully understand that PTO will “not
tolerate individuals or groups creating
Rock

problems with the overall membership.” But how do you suppose I did
that in a post that announced a call for
peace on the inside?
Attacking PTO Moderators &
Administrators: “Posting a thread or
reply to comment on, question, or criticize moderator or administrator action
is not appropriate in a public forum.”
Did I attack any administrator in
any public forum? In my reply to [a]
post I did say that my full post of the
document in question was censored,
but that was the reality and not an attack on anyone. I suppose I could have
used the word “deleted” but in this
context would you not agree that they
both mean the same thing—neither of
which is an attack on a moderator.
Deleting Posts and Closing
Threads: “PTO Administration has
the right to close or remove any post
or thread we deem inappropriate.”
This rule gives PTO broad latitude
in removing posts. In my years as a
prisoner I came into contact with a lot
of guards who abused the latitude of
rules, of the discretion given to them,
in order to oppress prisoners. Here
I sincerely believe you have abused
your discretion by censoring (let’s call
it by its right name) un-copyrighted
material sent to me by prisoners—material that is in the public interest for
the loved ones of California prisoners
to know. In your defense you continue
to cite rules that I have not violated.
Prison Talk Online represents the most
conservative element of the online prison
community. Some years ago I had to fight
like hell to get a forum on the subject of
Prisoner Activism. Yet if deem something
too radical, such as a desire for peace on
the inside, they promptly censor it.
PTO better serves the interests of prison
administrators than it does those of prisoners. So jealous and petty they are that one
of their rules is “Do not promote other
online communities” or you “will get …
banned without notice.” One would think
they would encourage many such communities. But who should be surprised, their
first rule says “PTO is not a forum open to
debating whether or not anyone should be
in prison, should prisoners and their families have rights, etc.” We are not to discuss
whether prisoners or their family members
have rights? That pretty much says everything that needs to be said about Prison
Talk Online.
Volume 1, Number 10

For those who have a loved one on PTO,
I would suggest you let them know about
Prison Family Online (http://www.prisonfamilyonline.com/forum.php), a smaller
(56,000 threads, 133,204 posts, and 2,526
active members) forum but more supportive of prisoner issues.
Lastly, to paraphrase former president
G.W. Bush, you are either with us or you
are with CDCR. By refusing to post material issued by the SHU reps PTO has objectively sided with CDCR. ●

SENATE PASSES
PRISON MEDIA
ACCESS BILL

T

he California Senate passed AB
1270 by Assembly member Tom
Ammiano today, sending the bill on
prison media openness to Governor Jerry
Brown for his signature. The bill would
restore the conditions that existed before
1996, the year that state corrections officials cut down on reporters’ ability to report directly on prison circumstances.
“We’re not just worried about reporters,” Ammiano said. “The lack of good
information is also a danger to the prisoners, the employees and the public at large.
It was under these closed-door conditions
that prison health conditions deteriorated to
the point that the courts stepped in. When it
comes to prisons, what we don’t know can
really hurt us.”
“California’s prisons are notoriously
off-limits to the kind of scrutiny that is
routine for most public agencies,” the Los
Angeles Times wrote in a recent editorial.
The bill deserves the Governor’s signature,
The Times wrote.
Under current procedures used by the
California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation, journalists cannot request
interviews with a particular prisoner to investigate conditions in the taxpayer funded
facilities. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to investigate any events, such as
the 2011 hunger strike in prisons.
Moreover, though, reporters may interview people in prisons who are selected by
prison officials, there is no way to conduct
follow-up interviews to those encounters,
nor is there a way to check whether a prisoner has suffered any repercussions as a
result of interviews.
“I hope that Governor Brown understands that lifting the media ban from our

prisons can help victims like myself know
what’s going on behind prison walls, improve conditions of confinement and save
tax payers money. We need to let the light
in,” said Shirley Wilson from the Youth
Justice Coalition in Los Angeles. Wilson’s
son was murdered and she now volunteers
with youth who are at risk of being locked
up.
“The public has the right to know how
our tax dollars are being spent inside prisons,” said Jerry Elster, an organizer with
All of Us or None. “If the state officials
have nothing to hide then what’s the problem with reporters having more access to
people in prison?”
“With passage of AB 1270 legislators
have voted for transparent and accountable
reporting of the state’s 32 prisons and the
more than 130 prisoners locked inside their
walls,” said Nancy Mullane, a prize-winning reporter and author on prisons. “With
the governor’s signature, no longer will
professional, credentialed, hard-working
journalists be forced to interview whichever inmate the prison authorities make available to them. For the first time in more than
two decades, journalists will be permitted
by law to request an interview with an inmate by name.”
Following passage, the Governor has
until September 30 to sign the measure.
The bill is supported by the California
Catholic Conference, the American Civil
Liberties Union, the California Newspaper
Publisher Association, Legal Services for
Prisoners with Children, California Correctional Peace Officers Association and
more than 20 other groups. It is sponsored
by Californians United for a Responsible
Budget, the California Coalition for Women Prisoners, the Center for Young Women’s Development, the Friends Committee
on Legislation of California and the Youth
Justice Coalition. ●

Prisoner
Artists!
Prison
ArtArt
is ais
nonprofit
Prison
a nonwebsite.
It chargesthat
a 10
profit website
percent
feeaiften
yourperart
charges
or
craftservice
sells. Send
SASE
cent
fee
if
for a free brochure. No
your art or craft
SASE, no brochure. This
sells.
Send
a SASE
offer
void
where
profor free
hibited
bybrochure.
prison rules.

Sell Your Art
On the Web
Sell prisonercreated art or
crafts (except
writings). Send
only copies, no
originals!
Prison Art Project
P.O. Box 47439
Seattle, WA 98146
www.prisonart.org
sales@prisonart.org
206-271-5003

9

Letters .................. Continued from page 7
Response to “Senate Bill X3-18
Challenged” (Rock newsletter, Sept.
2012)
In addition to the claims that have been
raised thus far:
1. The claims are that revoking our good
time credits violates the ex post facto
clause.
2. That the revocation violates our right to
due process.
As a suggestion, the individual might
want to consider including an additional
claim in his legal petition, from the perspective of Penal Code Sections 2932,
2933, etc. depriving prisoners who have
been validated as alleged prison gang
members housed on indefinite solitary confinement status, of our due components,
as to whether a prisoner is entitled to due
process via a disciplinary hearing, is if the
guilty finding impacts prisoner’s time credits and/or extends that prisoner’s prison
sentence. See: Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S.
472, 487 (1995); In re Johnson, 176 Cal.
App. 4th 290 (2009); and In re Jenkins, 50
Cal. 4th 1167 (2010).

So essentially, if a prisoner is serving a
life sentence, in addition to an indeterminate SHU term as an alleged prison gang
member, that prisoner is deemed “civilly
dead”! In that our life sentences are not
extended per the disciplinary finding, as
we’re not entitled to earn any “good time”
credits, pursuant to Penal Code Sections
2932, 2933, etc. Something to thin k about!
Dare 2 Struggle!
Dare 2 win!
Kijana Tashiri Askari, PBSP SHU

COP SHOOTS AND
KILLS DOUBLEAMPUTEE IN
WHEELCHAIR

S

eptember 23, 2012 “Information
Clearing House” - Houston - In an
incident outside of a group home in
Houston, a police officer shot and killed a
wheelchair bound, double-amputee after
the man threatened his partner. Unfortunately the object with which the man was
threatening the officer’s partner turned out

to be a pen.
Brian Claunch has been living for
the past 18 months with two other men.
Claunch apparently caused a disturbance
and became agitated when his caretaker
refused to give him a soda and a cigarette.
The police were then called.
According to police representatives,
when the two officers arrived, the disabled
man cornered one officer and threatened
him with a metal object. Claunch ignored
officers’ commands and made threats
against them and other occupants of the
home.
Houston Police Department spokeswoman, Jodi Silva said, “He was approaching
them aggressively. He was attempting to
stab them with a pen.”
According to Silva, Matthew Marin, a
five-year Houston Police Department veteran, fired his weapon at least one time,
fearing for his partner’s safety and his own.
Claunch died at the scene. The shooting officer, Marin, has been placed on three-day
administrative leave, which is a standard
procedure for all officer-involved shootings. Marin was reportedly involved in
another fatal suspect shooting three years
earlier. ●

Ed Mead, Publisher
Rock Newsletter
P.O. Box 47439
Seattle, WA 98146

FIRST CLASS MAIL